Yeah only on the now embarrassment of a stat site coinmarketcap.

 Go to a stat site that at least makes sure the currencies it list are not running their own shady exchange ha ha .

www.cryptmarketcap.com

Why would this happen now ha ha why would this former reputable site do this now ha ha ?

I don't understand... just 1 year ago the Bitcoin community would have done anything to make Bitcoin mainstream and get as many people involved as possible.

Now accessible coins like doge come along and suddenly make "noobs" show up and get interested in cryptocurrency and you complain?

Get off your high horse and stop being such a cynic. Just because you don't like something it doesn't mean the coin is useless. It's spreading *awareness* and that's more than you could ever ask for.

It's just funny to see so many people hating a coin because they don't like the meme  

I don't like it either, but this is fun, even Billy said the coin was just for fun, yet everyone seems to take it way too seriously!!!

Just relax and take the coins with a grain of salt, no one's forcing you too mine it, and if you're investing in things like this for the sole purpose of becoming rich then...well...you're just not doing it right. Never gamble with what you aren't willing to lose, simple. Just relax and enjoy it and go about your lives and don't invest every moment of everyday worrying about it. If you want to do serious trading and investing, then stick to the big coins

I personally have no doubt that Quark will overtake Litecoin. It's just a matter of time.

I've been thinking about the uniqueness of Quark's distribution.

All coins when first issued are raped and dumped by the botnets, etc. In fact no coin can overcome this relentless raping and dumping. All coins nearly die from it. Quark was no exception.

But now because of Quark's distribution, nearly all of its coins have been minted, there can be no more raping and dumping. There is no more constant downward pressure on the price. Now the price can increase with time.

I think that it is this natural price increase that is attractive to hedge fund investors and will result in Quark challenging litecoin's price of 0.025 btc.

What is a good way to know or research what alt-currencies will be good or not?  I agree as someone said some but not all will or could do well.  Yet, there are at least 100 alt-currencies available.  For instance, Quarkcoin is in the top 10, but at 243 million coins still outstanding, does anyone believe that this might hurt this particular currency?

What do u guys think about skycoin

Based on this article today on Marketwatch if there was an alt coin say CRD coin for Crude oil trading it would be an instant hit.   It stands to reason that an instantly traded currency would rule this fast paced marketplace.   To me this is a real world marketplace that stands to benefit from such a perfect trading apparatus.


There has been speculation for months about whether bitcoins might be accepted as legal tender by a major developed nation, whether the Chinese will accept them, or whether big web retailers will take then instead of conventional currencies. But the big breakthrough for digital money is more likely to come from the oil cartel, OPEC.

For decades, oil has been priced in dollars but key member states such as Iran, Algeria or Angola are not particularly friendly to the United States, even if they are not quite as hostile as they once were. They have been making noises about switching the price of oil out of the American currency for years, but have never quite managed to agree on alternative.

The euro was a runner for a while, until it started to implode. But what about bitcoins? It is a global currency, with no central bank trashing its value, and it might well prove a better store of value for countries that know their oil won’t last forever. If any single move establishes bitcoin as a serious monetary rival to the dollar, that will be it — and there will be more than a few wry smiles in Tehran over that.



 PS  If any of you devs pick this up keep me in mind 

wikipedia deserves te donation. all the beggars here do not

We went from about $15 at the beginning of 2013 to about $700 right now (we are still not done with 2013 either) and most of you think all it will do in 2014 will rise to $2000-$7000?  BTC increased in value about 50x this year.  If we multiply $700 X 50 we get $35,000.  I think that is totally realistic because people are just starting to hear about BTC and we are on the brink of more companies using and accepting BTC as well.

My expectations, that are based on the past behavior of BTC and the exponential growth rate is that we will hit $35,000 to even $50,000 by the end of next year.  

Just asking ... is it safe for the seller to accept paypal? Chargebacks and all .....

r/bitcoin – 89,324 readers; 750 users here now

r/litecoin – 15,588; ~80

r/dogecoin – 15,085; 655

How funny is that? 2014 will clearly be the year of the Shiba Inu. Look at all the hype it's generat-err digging.

 

I don't see your problem. Coins are on that address. Maybe they fixed it or something but now it seems like it is ok.

oh, also, and if it were, the block reward would no longer be 25 BTC. It would be 12.5 BTC.

Why?

Well, a 2,000 fold increase in the price of bitcoin would cause a huge demand in mining. You agree since you believe people would spend 3.6 billion per day mining.

Right now many ASICs can achieve 1 GH/s per watt of power. Let's assume ASICs don't get more efficient (they will) and assume an average electricity of $0.15 kwh. 3.6 billion dollars a day in electricity is enough for 1 TRILLION watts of power. or a total network hashrate of 1 x 10^12 * 1 x 10^9 = 10^21 or 1 zettahash/s worldwide hash rate. The current world hashrate is roughly 10 petahashes (1 x 10^16). That means the world hashrate would have to increase by 10^21/10^16 = 10^5 = 100,000 times. This would make the difficulty be around 100 trillion.

This would mean the world hashrate would have to double roughly 17 times. The hashrate would have to increase at such a ridiculously high rate that we would got through blocks so quickly that we would hit the next block having date in far less than two years from now. Thus the block reward would only be 12.5 BTC.

I'm too lazy to actually calculate how long it would take to hit the next halving. I'll let someone else do it.

Reward-Drop ETA: 2016-10-17 03:57:01 UTC

I wrote this paper on this exact topic a few days ago:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Lb_iLMmH5sIiYfGeHr9tCTnaoWjK25zDlvO0nXXgEng/edit?usp=sharing

The TL,DR is that we're fine now, but as Bitcoin grows in value we may have a problem with electricity usage.  We (I) must reanalyze later!

I researched it. It had moved to PoS only, so I bought based on no new coins. The devs fixed the PoW by dropping one or several blocks without discussion. They were silent until the fix came in. You can't research what the devs will do if they are silent.

They shouldn't have fixed by dropping blocks or forking. It destroys the integrity of the coin.

You've all heard the environmental/waste argument "the Bitcoin network uses too much computing power."

Right now I don't think this is a good argument. We're not spending that many resources mining if you make the comparison with the cost of securing banks and credit cards. However, if bitcoins jump in price like a lot of us hope they will, this will be a legitimate problem.

Imagine that the price of BTC reached $1,000,000 USD on January of 2016. The block reward will still be 25 BTC, meaning that every day, 3.6 billion dollars worth of bitcoins is distributed to miners. Miners would be expected to spend almost 3.6 billion dollars per day to mine these coins. That's 1.3 trillion dollars per year, or almost 2% of the wealth produced globally every year (as of right now).

Of course in this situation, the Bitcoin network will be very widely used and worth protecting from attacks. The question is: is 2% of global wealth devoted to protecting the Bitcoin network overkill? Maybe it would have enough protection with just 1% of global wealth, or even 0.2%.

The general problem is that the rewards to miners will be somewhat arbitrary and not calibrated to the security needs of the network, because they're based on parameters that Satoshi picked before he knew what the adoption/price curve would look like.