Come on, be reasonable and don't let emotion (e.g. "Trash Can") guide you. Just look at the amount money flowing in to the alts. To think that BTC is the end all, is a bit ignorant and if nothing else, it is much to early to say. The answer will come in time, and thus far it looks like there will be at least 3-5 viable alternative Cryptos - and that is smart. 

LTC alone has a Market Cap of 600 million. Don't discount this.

http://coinmarketcap.com/

So, to ask for some order on this disordered forum is a fair and needed request.

Its about sharing

  In no way I'm telling that we cannot TRY to extrapolate. I was just trying to say that for my mind this game is too hard to predict, because of so many unknown factors. By all means we can and we must think. Well cannot say anything about FBI and so on, but the demand is falling. One of the aspects of the current economical crisis is falling demand: not alarmism, not conspiracy, just compare income and expenditure of households both in USA and Europe and count the difference which was previously compensated by the growing debt(credit). That's all about it. Because of this gap the debts of the governments are growing and now they are growing exponentially (look for example monetary base of the leading fiat issuer), and how you can close the annual gap of 2 trillions without central bank emission with monetary base 800 billions and credit multiplier 17 instead of normal 4-6. Listen, the previous storm of 1929 caused severe deflation and if you look Mr. Bernanke's profile you will see that GD was the subject of his scientific work. What he was doing several years ago - he was compensating following demand by emission. But as time goes by it comes to settle in financial sector and with the change of the structure of extended monetary base it is not causing inflation (from the other side if we shall divide inflation into "household inflation" and "financial sector inflation" we shall see the growth of inflation in the f/s on the stock market). Really that's a very complicated subject (for me at least).  
[/quote]

In times of economic crisis, how can you argue that a solution (e.g. BTC) will be further ignored? Let's keep the issue simple - People are going to look to protect their money. And as governments start (e.g. U.S.) to ease back on Q.E. the money being held in stock markets, homes, etc. just will not see the same growth. In essence, we are living in a huge Ponzi Scheme and the question we are all wondering is, when will it end, pop, etc.? And should governments go back to the previous Q.E. levels, we have other problems, perhaps bigger, but we are past the point of no return, regardless.

And at this same time, interest is just huge in BTC (and Cryptos is growing). The number of people I meet who have heard of BTC just keeps growing.

Something has got to give.

It is much easier to organize some organization than it is to police disorganization imo.

In the time it takes to post this, the thread immediately preceding it is around half way down the first page. How can 1 mod possibly keep this forum in order? It just isn't possible.
And with the growing amount of posts, it is just going to get worse.

You would have to search for the studies, but the two studies that stand out are:
1 - Correlation between Mars falling on the main angles in the charts of professional athletes. This was incredible to read.
2 - The STRONG correlation between people with "mental issues" and strong 12 houses (e.g. many planets in there). I have actually come across this with quite a few acquaintance's while giving them readings.

The reason I became interested in astrology was through direct experience. That initial shocking experience caused me to look deeply into and research it. My background was in the sciences btw, so I was quite the skeptic. Science as THE proof is a bit limiting, for science sort of overlooks as you can't exactly mechanize and repeat it, quite often. Terrence McKenna said it best there. The problem, to a degree, with science is that it sets it's own boundaries and becomes its own limiting factor. It is limited by what it can measure at a given time. And when we look back at history, we see that. And oddly enough, it sort of goes back to the most improbabilities or leaps of faith, of them all - The Big Bang... go figure.

If I was to try to "prove" astrology, I wouldn't rely on scientific method per say. I would use it some, but it is a bit complicated and subjective with such topics. I would rather look through the eyes of Quantum Physics and the related sciences and look for possibilities and correlations. I do think it is coming within our event horizon to see how it works.

Anyway, this thread is for fun and not to prove anything to anyone. To each his own and let freedom prevail. After all, we sort of create our own realities.

I particularly like what NMC can do with it's decentralized DNS functionality. This can be overlaid to a whole lot more.

Anyway, what about with regards to the topic at hand?

ps - thanks for the post Raist

Wouldn't child-boards/sub-forums make life a lot easier on the mod as well?

Mod, you out there? 

Thanks for sharing that. That is the most I have heard.
Of course, it all comes down to network strength in the end.
As I have said, I'm a Quark holder but this is a concern of mine. It should be talked about.

I'm running the client to help and I opened the port up (but only see 6 active connections right now).

No, I'm not mining. Tried that but on my home computer it was just too much.

IAS

I (by far) hold BTC. But I really wonder if they want the alts to be sort of "on their own", disorganized, hard to follow, etc., here?

I think the current setup, makes it incredibly hard to find topics and such.

There are no child boards (sub-forums) here at all. Consider this:

There are over 600,000 posts here, and over 19,000 Topics. That is almost 2X as much as the main BTC forum with 4 child boards.
Mining has maybe 15% more yet has 5 child boards.
Marketplace, which is already a sub forum of Economics, has over 700k posts and has 9 Child boards.

See where this is going? It makes no sense, or does it?

I chose Quark because it is one of the few alts I know and am in. I also hold LTC, NMC and PPC. By far and away (90%) I am in BTC though. I love what one can do with NMC btw.
NMC is SHA256 (as is PPC). Quark breaks the typical SHA256 stranglehold (and ASIC "problem" perhaps).
LTC ASIC miners will shortly be on the way. And with that expect a huge jump in price imo.

The combination of 6 different algorithms is extremely interesting to me.

I also chose Quark because of it's mostly mined. As you can see from my initial post, this really poses a different situation, valuation wise, going forward (relative to BTC and LTC).

Lastly, I chose Quark because it is being "advertised" by Max Keiser and Bill Still. Rightly or wrongly, that is getting the name out there. Also mentioned on the Corbett Report. There seems to be quite a bit that has happened with development, perhaps related to this.

IAS

In a manner of seconds, things scroll off the first page. It makes finding even relatively new topics difficult. In the short time it took me to write this short post, the post I had just read is 3/4 of the way down the page!

There are many threads here relating to new Cryptos, their creation, support, software, etc. They need their own sub-forum.
Their are threads just posing questions in general, they should not be grouped with the above.
And perhaps a couple of other sub forums as well, ideas?

Thanks,
IAS

Why would you think demand is dropping? By all accounts, data, etc. it is increasing in both the USA and Europe.

The Market Cap of the Crypos, even when extrapolated out, are in no way, shape or form, even years away, from paying off national debts. Interesting point though, considering the FBI has quite a few BTC's, and probably more on the way.

Todays price is economic as it is being driven in large part by speculation. But we can see that services are being developed (and LOTS of money is flowing in) and the non speculative nature, economically speaking, is just getting started.

And for sure we can extrapolate out. What is the alternative, to do nothing? I think of this as a bit of an educated guessing game. The forum abounds with them and we have learned a lot during this process. e.g., Mining difficulty predictions

IAS

Is there any information available regarding how many nodes Quark has?
How many GPU's/Cpu's does Quark have defending it?
How can we make sense of Quarks Gh/s in relation to BTC, LTC, etc. considering that Quark has 6 algoriths? Does that matter much?

I'm trying to get a picture of it's network strength, regarding my post above. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=260031.msg4226452#msg4226452

Thx,
IAS

I enjoy listening to James. One of the few Investigative Reporters out there who is worth listening to.
I remember that mention actually. It was on Dec 2nd though.

I do see money flowing into Quark (and the other alts). We are in a critical spot with BTC imo, the other Cryptos will follow - up or down.

IAS

I'm not saying that will happen. But I am pointing out that that might be likely, due to the increased supply relative to Bitcoin. If demand doesn't change, LTC can't keep the same price ratio with BTC.
But, people who think they "missed the boat" on BTC, might just see the price of LTC and not consider the supply, and just rush in. After all, look at the other cryptos.

Another consideration, that I came upon by reading the Quark thread, is that all the SHA256 ASIC's out there, that are becoming less and less profitable, are probably, at least in part, going to be
pointed at other SHA256 coins. And with those coins, we will probably see LTC, BTC, Quarks, etc. purchased. This rush to alts imo, is JUST STARTING.

Something else to consider, in the next 2-6 months or so, we are going to see a huge rush of LTC ASIC's enter the market.
This, at least with BTC, was when the money was made. So, even though I'm trying to point to LTC's "potential problem" I'm also thinking it is poised to explode up,
as well as crazy resale value with LTC ASIC mining rigs.

IAS

I would love to know. I hold a few Quarks and like the experiment that it is (as I allude to above.)
But hold the same questions. It is hard to translate it's network strength linearly, I think.
Anyone?

I wish there was a way to re-open your mind...

I started this examination while looking at other Cryptos (Quark in particular) as BTC and LTC are #1 and #2. And the price "appreciation" of LTC relative to it's increasing supply became concerning.

Market Cap, ratios and number of coins:
BTC has roughly 12 million coins so far with a market cap of around $9 Billion. (Todays price of $764) Prices take from coinmarketcap.com
LTC has roughly 24 million coins so far with a market cap of around $600 Million. (This is 1/15th the size of BTC) Todays price of $24.76
QRK has roughly 247 million coins so far with a market cap or around $27 Million. (This is 1/321 the size of BTC. 1/21 the size of LTC.) Todays price of .11

Over the next 3 yrs, BTC will create 1.3 million coins each year, and then for the next 4 years will create 657k new coins per year. At the end of 2019 it should have around 18.5 million coins.
Over the next 2 yrs, LTC will create 10.5 million coins each year, and then 5.26 million coins each year for the next 4 years, then 1.3 million coins the next year, so at the end of 2019, should have 66.9 million coins.
Over the next 6 yrs, Quark will create roughly 6 million more coins. So, that should put us at around 253 million coins at the end of 2019, or there a bouts.
* - I didn't pick 2019 for any particular reason. I just went out 6 years from now. Play with this if you have any reasoning.

At around the end of 2019 we have this many coins and a Market cap (with todays price just for comparisons sake, feel free to play around here.):
BTC 18.5 million coins. $14 Billion
LTC 66.9 million coins. $1.7 Billion (1/8 the price of BTC)
QRK 253 million coins. $27.9 Million (1/500th price of BTC, 1/61 price of LTC)

Notice how much LTC jumps in value (3X it's current value, 1/8 the price of BTC - up from 1/15th) as it is growing so quickly in supply. Now perhaps this just means the price of BTC needs to appreciate more than that of LTC, hence we use the ratio quite often. Can this keep up?
Comparatively QRK "depreciates" as not many more coins are coming online relative to it's initial amount and also relative to the ratio compare to the other 2 coins. So, all other things being equal, QRK should appreciate quite a bit.
One can clearly see the aspect of having a coin mostly mined already really changes the equation regarding evaluation is concerned. It's growth model is very different. How do we interpret this?

Network Strength:
BTC's Network is 11.5 Million GH/s Blockchain.info
LTC's Network is 89 GH/s (Scrypt, We can't compare these numbers directly)
QRK's Network is 678 GH/s (Again, not sure how to compare these numbers, but even more complicated here) Taken from Vircurex's website
(There are other coins with HUGE hash rates on SHA256 e.g. - NMC 8 million, IXC and DEV 4+ million)
Can anyone add something regarding this? I really would like to get an idea of how strong QRK's network is, this is a telling consideration (eventually anyway).

I'm just working on some valuations for Quark.  Feel free to jump in here. I'm looking at the market caps in relation to number of coins and each other, as well as the network GH/s rate (need help here).
Of curious interest to me is how Quarks Market Cap will grow differently as there are relatively few coins being mined in relation to the outstanding number of coins. Quite the contrary to BTC/LTC.

Consider BTC is the leader and LTC the clear #2. Check my numbers below, but it is pretty simple and I'm just giving an estimate. Please check!

Market Cap, ratios and number of coins:
BTC has roughly 12 million coins so far with a market cap of around BTC. (Todays price of $764) Prices take fromhttp://coinmarketcap.com/
LTC has roughly 24 million coins so far with a market cap of around BTC. (This is 1/15th the size of BTC) Todays price of $24.76
QRK has roughly 247 million coins so far with a market cap or around $27 Million. (This is BTC the size of BTC. 1/21 the size of LTC.) Todays price of .11

Over the next 3 yrs, BTC will create 1.3 million coins each year, and then for the next 4 years will create 657k new coins per year. At the end of 2019 it should have around 18.5 million coins.
Over the next 2 yrs, LTC will create 10.5 million coins each year, and then 5.26 million coins each year for the next 4 years, then 1.3 million coins the next year, so at the end of 2019, should have 66.9 million coins.
Over the next 6 yrs, Quark will create roughly 6 million more coins. So, that should put us at around 253 million coins at the end of 2019, or there a bouts.
* - I didn't pick 2019 for any particular reason. I just went out 6 years from now. Play with this if you have any reasoning.

At around the end of 2019 we have this many coins and a Market cap (with todays price just for comparisons sake, feel free to play around here.):
BTC 18.5 million coins. $14 Billion
LTC 66.9 million coins. $1.7 Billion (1/8 the price of BTC)
QRK 253 million coins. $27.9 Million (1/500th price of BTC, 1/61 price of LTC)

Notice how much LTC jumps in value (3X it's current value, 1/8 the price of BTC - up from 1/15th) as it is growing so quickly in supply. Now perhaps this just means the price of BTC needs to appreciate more than that of LTC, hence we use the ratio quite often.
Comparatively QRK "depreciates" as not many more coins are coming online relative to it's initial amount and also relative to the ratio compare to the other 2 coins. So, all other things being equal, QRK should appreciate quite a bit.
One can clearly see the aspect of having a coin mostly mined already really changes the equation regarding evaluation is concerned. It's growth model is very different. How do we interpret this?

Network Strength:
BTC's Network is 11.5 Million GH/s Blockchain.info
LTC's Network is 89 GH/s (Scrypt, We can't compare these numbers directly) Litcoin Hashrate
QRK's Network is 678 GH/s (Again, not sure how to compare these numbers, but even more complicated here) Taken from Vircurex's website
(There are other coins with HUGE hash rates on SHA256 e.g. - NMC 8 million, IXC and DEV 4+ million)
Can anyone add something regarding this? I really would like to get an idea of how strong QRK's network is, this is a telling consideration (eventually anyway).

IAS

Arn't there 1million coins a year to be mined? Considering that compared to the 247 or so million mined coins, that seems like enough to be profitable.

Notice they generally have low activity levels and other alt coins in their sigs. Quite simply there is money to be made from doing what they are doing, no matter how ingenuous they may be.

For example, look at what adolf said regarding the early mine. That is/was a concern to me but I think it is a viable alternative, an experiment and we should look further at it, discuss it, don't just knock it.
Make the talk a conversation, 2 ways, not just bashing. Using an early mine has some potential advantages (and note, even with BTC there are very few holders having VERY large amounts). I wish I could have
gotten into quark sooner, but anyway I see how the distribution model in an early mine coin (that is ASIC resistance for a bit longer than most coins due to the multiple algorithms it uses) has certain benefits.
For example, the arms race to mine is now not quite as much on the forefront. Perhaps this can be both a good and a bad thing, but look at it, investigate it. Enjoy another experiment here. Also, the low price
as many coins were already mined are going to be VERY attractive for people wanting to get into something "cheaper" and "early", etc. People with many coins will sell some for sure and distribution will take place.
We'll see how that goes.

Somewhat related, the high reliance on the SHA256 hardware coupled with new hardware making the old hardware mostly obsolete means newer SHA256 coins are gonna get attention, clearly. (Kolin mentioned this.)
So, we are probably going to see a trickle from these SHA256 coins (and soon to be ASIC LTC's and other SCRYPT coins) into Quark imo. Due to most of it's mining already having been done (relatively speaking), I think it might be seen eventually as a store of value as it relates to the centralization of the ASIC miners. This in an unknown though, and it is all unfolding just beyond our view currently.

Some concerns - for sure - how will the network be secured relative to the lower (?) demand with mining? We will see. As Cryptos become more popular and more money flows in, you will see networks attacked, 51% attacks, DDOS, etc. happen and that will be needed and weed out the weak ones. How strong is our network? Bots a problem?

So, instead of bashing, I'll take some of my chances here and try to look deeper into something it sounds like, quite a few people don't understand, but seem hell bent on bashing. That pulls me closer...

And I get the feeling 2014 is really going to be an interesting year with the Cryptos.

Its about sharing