There should be a Wikisite on the history of scam and failed coins. We need to actually keep records of every coin, how it was launched and the end result after 6 months to a year. Eventually we will need a review site for coins.

I wont support it because it's still nation stage nationalist crypto. Chinacoin? Why not support USDollarcoin then?

I wonder which government is sponsoring Chinacoin? Hmm...

Whatever they release must be a guaranteed 2 month ROI or I'm not buying it and I don't think others will either. They should give it enough Ghash that we get our money back no matter how much the difficulty is expected to rise. If they cannot do that, it's a good idea to just mine Litecoins.

Premining is bad because the lucky people are artificially selected. What Mincoin did was fair because anyone could have mined it for those 3 days and they would be an early adopter. I think basically if people other than the founders are allowed to get rich it's not a premine.

Rootcoin

BTC-E was right to add feathercoin at this time even if its a pump and dump coin. Pump and dump coins have a place. The place is to make mining profitable enough so people don't quit mining altogether. The purpose that it must be profitable is because mining is becoming more expensive with ASICS.

Everyone saw this coming and as a trend it's going to get worse because of ASICS. ASICS are hard to find, hard to buy, cost as much as a car ($10,000-20,000), where are people supposed to just get that kind of money? OH I know, mine feathercoins for a few months.

In order to support Bitcoin we need some alt-coins to act as get rich quick. Where do you think the money to buy expensive mining equipment comes from? It comes from mining. Miners have to get rich to buy ASICS.

At being said once you have plenty of mining equipment why would you have to stop at mining feathercoin? Now you're free to mine more types of coins. But for now the purpose of feathercoin is to help miners profit enough to afford ASICs in the near future. It's a pump and dump coin and I actually hate the design of it (400 million coins is just stupid), but I also understand it has to exist as a response to ASICS.

When people were making ASICS in such limited quantities they knew that $9000-10,000 for a device means people will have to basically get rich in order to keep mining. Feathercoin easily is making people $3000 a month.



This is how miners will have to make money in the world of ASICS. I don't particularly like that I'll have to mine feathercoins because LTC isn't profitable but any smart miner will mine what is profitable to be able to save to afford the ASICs.

It's the pumps are only going to get faster and more aggressive with each generation. Get used to it and perhaps buy some cheap coins so you can make hundreds of thousands of dollars like they are.

That is why there should be an exchange rate between games and that is why not every game has to support Xcoin. In many games that is a good thing. If you put in X amount of time to become fabulously wealthy in one game such as for example Diablo 2 and then Diablo 3 comes out and you want to transfer your wealth from Diablo 2 to Diablo 3 you should be able to. The exchange rate can be high enough to discourage a person or there can be a limit to how much a person an transfer.

The way things are now people already use USD to do this so nothing would change. The integrity of Diablo 2? Diablo 2 always had people using USD to buy accounts or buy in game items. It's really simple, many games will have to be redesigned and also not every game will support something like this but ultimately if players really want to make these trades they will regardless of if the game supports it. Nothing stops me from setting up a site right now to let people bid on in game characters with wealth and items in exchange for Bitcoin.

So I do see your argument but I don't think that just because some games would be ruined for you that we shouldn't have an Xcoin at all. The ability to transfer results or wealth between games is incredibly useful and I don't think you've factored it all in how much it could change gaming but not only gaming but the entire economy and how we live. You will have people who will get wealthy in the game world and in the real world at the same time. Why wouldn't we want this as gamers?

Now think of the potential of ARGs. With an ARG you can literally create games which solve real world problems and people can get paid and get wealthy playing those games. The only thing missing is the universal global virtual currency to connect all the different serious game networks together. A serious game is a gamification which solves a real world or serious problem. Diablo 2 and Diablo 3 don't really solve any real world problems. That being said even if they don't solve real world problems and while I do not want these less than serious games to be ruined I would put priority on the serious games because those games can fundamentally change our world and the economy.

Here you go http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternate_reality_game
                 http://www.argn.com/tag/serious_games/

Please do some research into ARGs if you don't know how important they are. Just as Bitcoin and the Internet can change the world ARGs can fundamentally change what work is. It is a development such as this which would make Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies mainstream as everyone would want to play some ARG at some point and would have to buy the coins and spend them within the context of the game.


Yep , that is what I was thinking. But I don't know enough about colored coins as I have not seen anything actually implement the concept, I would say that yes it's related. I don't think it should use BTC but something which is based around it but somehow more suitable to ARGs and games.  Namecoin is something I was thinking about as well as having interesting properties for something like this. This thread isn't a technical thread, it's a thought experiment to see if the Bitcoin community is ready for something like this and to see how it would be received.

It's only good if those coins are useful and evolve. More trash isn't good.

You're misunderstanding the psychology of coin collectors. I have collected stuff all my life. My uncle taught me to collect coins, then it was onto baseball and basketball cards, and so on and so forth. The value in whatever you're collecting depends on the condition it's in and how rare it is. How valuable would a limited edition anything be if you decide later on that because the USD moved that now you're going to make it less limited? That is basically what the US banks and federal reserve already do and why would we want to bring that weakness into cryptocurrencies?

I think the total number of coins must be less than Bitcoin to be worth more than Bitcoin. It's not really something you can disprove because the math is the truth. Mincoin is the most valuable coin and I think this coin should copy Mincoin and go with let's say 8 million total coins (Mincoin has 10 million). The only mistake Mincoin made was they had a 3 day IPO launch which most people believe was a bit too quick but beyond that as far as the mathematics behind it go, for a mere fork of Litecoin it has better long term value than Litecoin could ever have. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=165397.0 The math does not lie.

Now am not saying everything about Bitcoin or Mincoin is right but the one thing Bitcoin and Mincoin did get right was to limit the total number of coins. That was one of the best decisions. The volatility isn't going to be an issue once the infrastructure is in place do you're trying to say Netcoin should try to solve a problem which wont be a problem by the time Netcoin becomes mainstream?

Netcoin's problem will be growing fast enough and being valuable enough. The infrastructure will be in place and so a fast-track IPO in my opinion is the best way to do it not just for Netcoin but for future coins where the launches should be faster and faster because there shouldn't be the assumption that there will be time to launch them like there are now. Either the environment will be much more hostile to cryptocurrencies or much more competitive and either way a quick launch is a competitive advantage. Bitcoin was the first so it could take 5 years because there was no infrastructure. The first websites and search engines could take a longer time but the growth rate has to improve.

I'm saying Netcoin could get away with 11 million coins, this is less than Bitcoin and competitive with Mincoin. It cannot get away with 400 million coins or 100 million coins or 60 million coins. It has to be less than Bitcoin to be competitive with Bitcoin because no one is going to buy into Netcoin if Netcoin isn't worth as much (and never will be) as Bitcoin. It should be a decision where Netcoin will eventually be worth double what Bitcoin is worth and then everyone would buy Netcoins as soon as it's useful and they can spend it.

Litecoin indirectly inflates Bitcoin.

Then why hasn't he implemented 2 factor authentication? I talked to the guy and suggested he at least support Yubikey. If you're gonna run a blind exchange you need to at least support. Even Bitcointalk runs with SSL.

For this moment in time it's not an issue but considering the mathematics behind what Mincoin's actual value is, this is unsustainable. Mincoin was launched only last month so I'm cutting them some slack.

You should email her.

It's not impossible it's just difficult. The most difficult part is paying bills, once that is solved it becomes easier. Other issues are buying gas and stuff like that.

Show her this http://billpayforcoins.com/payyourbills.php

Consider making some physical PPcoins then?

PPcoin has great potential. It also has to be security audited in the very near future. Sunny King please arrange for a proper security audit so we can push to make PPcoin mainstream.

Litecoin is a scheme to water down the value of Bitcoin by producing a 400million coins and then taking away the miners. Litecoin is an inferior coin because theres over 400 million.

Yes it could be a honeypot set up by hackers to sniff exchange passwords used by dummys who use the same password on multiple exchanges. Not a very good idea for a coin which is even more valuable than Bitcoin. It also means the people running the exchange can someday decide to commit robbery and take your coins merely by logging in as you.

The exchange doesn't even have secure socket layer.