How popular are all these coins??

The REAL test of a crypto is the "CLIENT DOWNLOAD COUNTS"

Does anyone know of a site where these are published in the same format as coinmarketcap.com

I think it'll be very interesting to see the adoption rates of each crypto.
 

And the hashrates! All the bashing is not making any difference to it's progress. I await the 'give it a few months' and 'I'll bump this in 3 months time' comments

It will be very interesting to see 'CLIENT DOWNLOAD COUNTS' for all altcoins
 

I said that in the post. Read it again. Yahoo ruled for some time before Google came along. Have you forgotten?

Seriously. If you know the internet, then you know how these things go.

Yahoo... Does anyone here remember how Yahoo started? Does anyone remember how it was seen as a joke when it first started because of the name and the concept behind the name (a race of crude nasty people from Gulliver's travels)? It's now known globally as Yahoo inc. And it blasted away some very strong competition in the process. Remember Alta-Vista? Of course, Google stole the lion's share in the end, but Yahoo is still a major player in the portal arena.

It's possible that DogePower will do something that other crypto's can only evangelise about. Large scale anonymous person-to-person transactions. Dogecoin 'looks' like it's on the verge of entering public consciousness. If it does, then people will want to get their hands on some dogecoins. I can more easily see people exchanging items for dogecoins, than I can see them exchanging items for any other coin around now. Just for the fun value. I can see a person exchanging an old phone for some dogecoins (on the spot, face to face - not via a website or other third party). The apps probably don't exist right now, but with a QR code and a mobile phone, all things are possible!

No interaction with an exchange for a USD equivalent. Daily exchange price fluctuations will have just as much effect on the general public as everything else that fluctuates in price does (e.g. fuel prices). This is just a person to person interaction that's completely private based on the value that those 2 individuals place on whatever item or service is to be exchanged.

So anyone mocking the name, origin, or theme of the name Dogecoin needs to remember (or find out) where Yahoo inc came from.

tl;dr? Dogecoin is the new Yahoo

DO NOT MINE GRANDCOIN FOR PROFIT - You have been warned

If a Grandcoin pool estimates that you'll get 10K coins/day, then expect no more than 2,000-3,000 per day max. I don't know what's going on with that coin but it's reward estimations are way off. Those estimations are causing it to seem profitable on coinwarz.com. It is blatantly wrong.

If you are mining to support the coin then go ahead, but if you are mining for profit then you will be sorely disappointed.

I mined Grandcoin for 2 days at 2MH/s. This should have brought in 32K coins based on pool estimates (all GDC pools estimates are the same - ALL pool estimates - ALL of them). After 2 days I scraped through 10K coins and I only got that because I was determined that I must at least get to a milestone before pulling out (vanity probably). It's profitability is one third (maximum) of what is being quoted. Don't believe me, go ahead and find out for yourself.

DO NOT MINE GRANDCOIN FOR PROFIT - You have been warned

Couldn't wait. Upgraded to 3.1.1. All good so far. I'll give it 24hrs to make sure it's as stable as it was at 2.11.4. I tried 3.8.4 but it look like that needs an OS upgrade which I'm not prepared to do right now.

Thanks. I'll try it out tomorrow 

I agree. I'm still on CGMiner 2.11.4. I should upgrade but I don't want to mess with it.

Here's my settings. I have 3x MSI 7950. I get 650-670 KH/s, max temp 69, 250W from the wall, from each. It runs 24x7 and only stops when I stop it. GPU 2/3 were running much slower than GPU 0 until I lowered GPU 0 intensity to 19. Then all 3 GPUs leveled out at 650-670 KH/s (average, not max/min).

"intensity" : "19,20,20",
"vectors" : "1,1,1",
"worksize" : "256,256,256",
"kernel" : "scrypt,scrypt,scrypt",
"lookup-gap" : "2,2,2",
"thread-concurrency" : "22400,22400,22400",
"shaders" : "1792,1792,1792",
"gpu-engine" : "0-1100,0-1100,0-1100",
"gpu-fan" : "0-85,0-85,0-85",
"gpu-memclock" : "1500,1500,1500",
"gpu-memdiff" : "0,0,0",
"gpu-powertune" : "20,20,20",
"gpu-vddc" : "0.962,0.962,0.962",
"temp-cutoff" : "95,95,95",
"temp-overheat" : "85,85,85",
"temp-target" : "75,75,75",
"gpu-dyninterval" : "7",
"gpu-platform" : "0",
"gpu-threads" : "1",
"hotplug" : "5",
"log" : "5",
"queue" : "0",
"scan-time" : "1",
"expiry" : "120",
"no-pool-disable" : true,
"scrypt" : true,
"temp-hysteresis" : "3",
"shares" : "0",
"kernel-path" : "/usr/local/bin"

Try it out. I'd say set it to intensity 20 since it's not GPU 0

Try -g 1

PEOPLE!!! Have you never heard of

Automatic Payout Threshold???

Set it up on every pool. How many times do you have to be told

 

much working :-)

A little bit off topic (but in the same ballpark) is that today's litecoin madness showed that reliable infrastructure doesn't yet exist (in totality).

I was on a few alt-coin IRC chats and the number of people screaming about late transactions and sites not being able to do what they should do was amazing. People were waiting hours for coins they'd transferred from one place to the other.

Maybe it's the fault of the press but I thought these transactions were immediate. That wasn't the case today. A Faster Payment via the bank is definitely instantaneous (as quickly as you can get to the account receiving the money to check it has arrived). 6 confirmations to complete were taking as much as 30mins. I know the network was drowning under the increased load (Vircurex even had to stop a few withdrawal services), but it's not what I expected to see.

Your issue with buying a bitcoin is just more proof of the lack of a reliable infrastructure.

It will change though. People are flooding in and lots of sites are popping up to service them.

I'd even suggest paying over the odds if you believe in bitcoin. Some analysts say it's going to rise to about $600,000 (eventually) so paying an extra $100-$200 today might be worth it.

Two weeks ago, if you'd said you'd paid $800 for a $600 bitcoin people would have laughed in your face and called you a sucker.

3rd place appears to be up for grabs. I've heard good and bad things about each of those mentioned. I think BTC/LTC is too far ahead to lose at this point in time.

At the moment Peercoin appears to have a slight lead over the others IMO (due to market cap of 10x the next competitor - Namecoin - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cryptocurrencies).

I must admit that Anoncoin seems interesting and could be a dark horse if it's claims hold up in the long term (it could end up being a subversive black market currency). Using the anonymous icon for marketing is a bit much though, and it could find itself under attack for that!

If too many survive then we could end up with a FOREX type scramble based on pure speculation creating a massive bubble followed by an almighty crash where only 2-3 survivors emerge unscathed.

But anyways, even this post is just pure speculation!

Exciting times indeed!

Personally I think 2 is enough. A main currency (possibly BTC) and a tracker (possibly LTC) to keep it honest.

It could even be the other way round, where LTC is the main currency, and BTC (though first to emerge) is the tracker keeping LTC honest. LTC seems to be more suited for use as a digital currency (from what I've read). BTC seems more speculative than LTC.

I think that if there are too many that survive then all we've done is transferred the old banking systems (where every country has it's own currency that can fluctuate against the others) into the digital realm.

And what would be the point of that??

Thanks for all the comments guys! Interesting reading!

I think the statement quoted above goes some way to altering my perception of cryptocurrencies (thanks DannyHamilton). So, rather than 'mining', it's actually 'transaction processing' that's going on here. In effect then, if the 'crypteconomy' replaces current banking practices, then the energy used in transaction processing may actually be reduced in the long term? For the present, as the crypteconomy emerges we are really observing an overlap of the old and new technologies and hence an increase in energy usage?

Once the old banking methods are gone (HURRAH!), then hopefully we'll actually have an overall reduction in the energy used to maintain financial transaction processing.

Is it reasonable to assume this? (without actually doing the sums necessary to confirm such a conclusion).

I'm going to get burnt for this:

I've been looking into all of these new cryptocurrencies. I whole-heartedly agree with the concept of the economic model and the revolutionary aspect, when you consider QE (Quantative Easing) and the devaluation of paper money. Currency is merely a promise in this day and age. Nothing else really. Money is no longer backed by a physical entity residing in a bank vault. Those days are long gone so one currency is just as good as the next (as long as it has some form of use/circulation). I also look forward to digital trading. Can't wait to buy a toaster (a flying one please) for .000001 of whatever cryptocurrency wins the race.

There's just one thing that sits uneasily with me.

Does anyone else think there's something askew in the amount of planetary resources being used to create these new currencies? Rows of graphics cards burning up planetary resources to create currency. It's not what I expected to find when I started looking.

I should probably keep that thought to myself (everyone seems so excited) but I wonder what other people's thoughts are on that.
 

First post. Looking forward to the new digital economy!

I've been reading a lot about cryptocurrencies recently (and researching them). I was wondering why there are so many? Do they all have individual uses? Are they all geographic in nature? There seems to be more than is required for a cybereconomy.