Bitcoin Forum
June 25, 2019, 09:01:28 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.0 [Torrent] (New!)
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 ... 77 »
181  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Litecoin Is NOT Dead (It Is Just Dying A Slow Death) on: June 25, 2014, 04:07:49 AM
I haven't had time to read this whole thread yet. I did skim the first post and would like to quickly address some points.

CoinHoarder, I'm sorry that you felt that I somehow had something against you. There's no club that you aren't part of. Likely, the reason was that since I supported you in person, I didn't see the need to post a reply to your thread. When you decided to stop doing your coin, I think I posted saying that's unfortunate. I don't check the litecoin forum as much as I should, so I must have missed your other posts. Coinographic's post caught my eyes recently, so that's why I posted. I'm not more excited about his coin than smoothie's coin or your coin. In the end, people shouldn't care whether or not they get my support or not. This is a community after all.

As for me not appearing that much for a while, I was busy with real life. I had Greedy help me with a lot of stuff. Turned out, that trust was not well placed. So I had to come back and be more active and try to clean up the mess. And this too should not matter that much. Do you judge Litecoin based on whether or not I'm still active? How about Satoshi and Bitcoin?
182  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Can Litecoin hold the #2 spot? Doubtful..and here are the coins who will benefit on: June 14, 2014, 09:35:49 AM
TheMage pointed me to this thread. I figure I should correct some facts.

Yes, it was my brother, Bobby, who claimed the most of the Chinese exchanges are faking their volume. Given the depth of the order books, it's very likely that this is the case. But this affects both Bitcoin and Litecoin. It may be true that it affects Litecoin more than Bitcoin as OKCoin's LTC volume is ridiculously high. And it looks like coinmarketcap.com's volume does not include OKCoin: http://coinmarketcap.com/volume.html#ltc

The reason why Litecoin's launch is fair is because it was publicly announced AND binary/source publicly distributed days before the launch. At launch time, almost everyone that cared about alt currency at that time was ready to mine litecoins the second I released the config params for the genesis block. So maybe Litecoin has a small instamine, but those instamined coins were distributed as fairly as possible at the time. Sadly, NONE of the copycat altcoins that came after Litecoin copied this critical feature of Litecoin. Most of these newer coins were launched to a small community or just the devs and were instamined by that small group. Others we premined.

And people like to spread FUD about the fact that someone was GPU mining litecoins at the start. A while ago, I did a difficulty analysis of the Litecoin start and showed that it was extremely unlikely that someone was GPU mining. The hashrate and subsequent increase matches the thousands of CPUs that were mining Litecoin at that time. If someone can find that thread, please post it here. I've said this many times, and I will state it again. I did not GPU mine Litecoin at the start and for that matter, I have NEVER GPU mined Litecoin at all. I did have 8 GPUs back then and was mining Bitcoin with it until I retired them early last year. Actually, if you want proof, you can ask Roger Ver. He was hosting my GPUs at his memorydealers warehouse. And I had them set up to mine bitcoins and left them there mining bitcoins and never touched them until 2013. And I don't have any vested interest in ASIC hardware. The reason for not switching PoW algorithm is because the risk of hard fork.

The reason why I chose Scrypt for Litecoin is more so because Litecoin needed to be mined by a different class of hardware than Bitcoin than it is because it was ASIC-resistant. I never believed Scrypt was ASIC-proof. The ASIC-resistancy was important though and it helped delay ASICs for as long as possible. The reason why that was important was because you need the coin's early miners to be as decentralized as possible. Why? Because in the beginning, the miners are the users. These will be the people that support the coin and help spread it. If the coin started with only 100 people able to mine it, then it won't go anywhere. As the coin matures (like Bitcoin and now Litecoin), the user base is no longer the same as the miner base. And having a more centralized miner base is not a big problem. Security of the coin is determined by how much money is spent protecting it. And ASICs helps with security because it makes it easy for people to pour a lot of money into mining hardware. But remember, centralization of miners does not mean the coin is centralized. The user base of the coin is still decentralized. If the miners decide to make a change in the software that people don't like, the majority of the user can choose to not accept the new version. Sure, with 51%, a miner can double spend his own transactions, reject other blocks, or do transaction withholding attacks, but it would be financial suicide to do that. So this is why I welcome Scrypt ASICs. I think the value of the security it brings outweighs the mining centralization that comes with ASICs.

So why is Litecoin valuable today? Here's what I think justifies Litecoin's maketcap and why it will stay #2 behind Bitcoin for the foreseeable future:
  • Litecoin's trade volume dwarfs most other coins.
  • Litecoin is supported by a huge number of exchanges. No other altcoin comes close.
  • Like the comparison or not, Litecoin is silver to Bitcoin's gold. Having a cryptocurrency trading pair is important for arbitrage reasons. Litecoin is playing that role today. It's hard for another coin to take over that role.
  • Litecoin is supported by payment processors like GoCoin and, if I can help it, Coinbase. Payment processors are critical in the path towards mass adoption.
  • Litecoin is accepted by a huge amount of merchants. Look at http://coinmap.org/
  • Litecoin has ATM support.
  • Litecoin is protected by its own network of hardware dedicated to Scrypt mine. And Litecoin's hashrate dwarfs that of other Scrypt coins. The amount of money spent protecting Litecoin will increase substantially with Scrypt ASICs.
  • Litecoin runs on well tested codebase. Because it is basically Bitcoin with a few changes.
  • We have a great dev team and an awesome Litecoin association.

Some of the altcoins come close with respect to some of these points: nxt (devs, hardware), dark (trade volume), doge (merchant processor, atm, devs)
But no other coin really comes close to having all of these features.

And of course, Bitcoin is by far ahead of Litecoin. I never expected Litecoin to overtake Bitcoin. I always envisioned it as be used side by side with Bitcoin just like silver and gold. As we are already seeing, Bitcoin will not be able to handle all the transactions required for a global payment system. This is where I see alt currencies can help. You need other cryptocurrencies protected by different hardware networks to help with the transaction load. Naturally (because of the price of Bitcoin), the more expensive transactions will be on the Bitcoin network. It's more secure but it also has a higher fee. This will push cheaper transactions to other networks. I think there will be 3 currencies that will be used for 3 types of transactions: buying expensive things like houses/cars, buying gifts/meals/drinks, and microtransactions/tipping. And today, these 3 currencies will be Bitcoin, Litecoin, and Dogecoin.
183  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [6600Th] Eligius: 0% Fee BTC, 105% PPS NMC, No registration, CPPSRB (New Thread) on: June 13, 2014, 11:49:30 PM
My guess is he's mining at a lot of pools at the same time and withholding blocks. When he finds a block at one pool, he would move all his hashes to that pool to increase his payout percentage. And then release his valid block after 10 minutes or less. This way, he can increase his expected payout.

It wouldn't be hard to catch this if the pool is paying attention.
184  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN] Litecoin - a lite version of Bitcoin. Launched! on: May 26, 2014, 09:05:13 PM
not an active community at all =/ how is ltc even at the price it is with the amount of people behind it is this a joke? would of been nice to copy/paste btc 4 years ago and mine the fuck out of it with my gpus/ oh wait its already been done  by coblee and BCX and a few others

I have never GPU mined Litecoins... ever.

About the community, are you active in the USD community?
185  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: (Unofficial) [ANN] Litecoin [LTC] to X11 algorithm hardfork on: April 01, 2014, 04:59:31 PM
Well, I'm sad to see that you are going ahead with this plan. And using the 65% vote of a tiny poll as the reason. I would have to assume this is a FUD attempt by a group that is trying to destroy Litecoin or by a misguided group that has no vision on what's good for Litecoin. Either way, the Litecoin development team will fight hard against it. Though it's a super waste of our time and resources.

On the other hand, the Darwinian in me says that if a single person (or team) can bring down a coin simply by persuading people to accept a forked version of it, then it's not robust enough to be used as a currency and therefore deserves oblivion.

This hijacking attempt will be a good test for Litecoin.

Agreed. If this FUD attempt can bring down Litecoin, then Litecoin is not strong enough. And if this rogue development team can overthrow us, then we don't deserve to be running Litecoin development. This is an open decentralized currency, so time will tell.
186  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: (Unofficial) [ANN] Litecoin [LTC] to X11 algorithm hardfork on: April 01, 2014, 10:08:06 AM
We feel the 65% in the poll is a pretty convincing number for us to continue on our project.

The original developers vote against but Litecoin is not owned by them.
Litecoin is owned by the community.

The developers try to spread FUD, we expected this.
Phase 2 of project "LTC 2 X11" will start in 3 weeks from now.
We will contact pool operators of major pools and exchanges to make the transition as smooth as possible.

If pools and or exchanges won't follow us, we understand we can't finish our project. We need their support for this to succeed.
I expect they will be contacted by Coblee too, so we really need to convince them.

Thanks for your support so far!

Hey X11 team, would you be willing to make a post to respond to our posts? https://litecointalk.org/index.php?topic=18166.0
Specifically:
- Who are you and why are you hiding behind the user Beeker?
- X11 is possibly less ASIC-resistant than even Scrypt. So why X11?
- Would you just switch algorithm again when ASIC is ever built for X11?
- Are you not concerned about splintering the Litecoin userbase with this controversial change?
- How do you plan to convince the exchanges to switch to your fork when you don't have the support of the Litecoin developers, the Litecoin Association, and have no influence within the community (I'm assuming this since we don't know who you are), and have no control of litecoin.org and other litecoin websites?
- Are you willing to not use the name Litecoin/LTC so as to not cause mass confusion?

Looking forward to your reply.

And when you do reveal yourself. Please please convince us why your development team will do a better job than the current Litecoin development team moving forward. What kind of development work have you done on Bitcoin, Litecoin, or any other alts. And lastly, if your motivations are to save Litecoin, than why have you not contributed to the Litecoin codebase previously and joined our team?
187  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: [POLL] Would you support a Litecoin [LTC] to X11 algorithm hardfork? on: March 31, 2014, 10:44:59 AM
Here's our response: https://litecointalk.org/index.php?topic=18166.0
188  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: (Unofficial) [ANN] Litecoin [LTC] to X11 algorithm hardfork on: March 31, 2014, 10:42:28 AM
Here's our response: https://litecointalk.org/index.php?topic=18166.0
189  Economy / Goods / Re: [For Sale] Bitcoin Accepted Here : Neon Signs - Now Shipping! on: March 18, 2014, 09:27:19 AM
Here's mine:
190  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN] Litecoin - a lite version of Bitcoin. Launched! on: January 23, 2014, 12:04:18 PM
I'm going to be at the Miami Bitcoin conference this weekend. Will be giving a talk on the history of Litecoin. Come check it out and say hi.
191  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN] Litecoin - a lite version of Bitcoin. Launched! on: December 15, 2013, 08:48:52 AM
Litecoin 0.8.6.1 released with lower min transaction fees of 0.001 LTC.
Please see: http://litecoin.org/upgrade
192  Economy / Service Announcements / Re: [ANN] bitaddress.org Safe JavaScript Bitcoin address/private key on: November 05, 2013, 10:11:44 AM
Thanks for this great update, pointbiz!
https://liteaddress.org/ updated: https://forum.litecoin.net/index.php/topic,6762.0.html
193  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Litecoin port of Bitaddress.org? on: November 05, 2013, 09:52:27 AM
Liteaddress has been updated with BIP38 encrypted paper wallet support:
http://liteaddress.org/
194  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Use Google Spreadsheets to automatically keep track of your wallet balance on: October 29, 2013, 01:05:47 AM
You can use http://blockchain.info/q/addressbalance/1blahblah or http://blockchain.info/q/getreceivedbyaddress/1blahblah
But be careful as that returns a number in satoshis, so you have to divide it by 100000000
195  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN] Litecoin - a lite version of Bitcoin. Launched! on: October 09, 2013, 09:33:54 PM
We decided to do a reddit AMA with the Litecoin dev team on Litecoin's 2nd anniversary!
http://www.reddit.com/r/litecoin/comments/1o3fdz/we_are_the_litecoin_dev_team_ama/
196  Economy / Service Discussion / Re: Mt. Gox - Oct 15...demand official update on: October 09, 2013, 04:55:31 PM
MtGox's lawsuit is with Coinlab and not Coinbase. Smiley

MtGox is really fighting a tough battle. I can't fault them for taking so long. But I agree, some more communication would be nice.
197  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN] Litecoin - a lite version of Bitcoin. Launched! on: October 07, 2013, 05:17:03 PM
October 7 was when the seeds were planted. Smiley
October 13 is the birthday.
198  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN] Litecoin - a lite version of Bitcoin. Launched! on: October 07, 2013, 04:13:37 PM
It's nearly Litecoin's second birthday. Here's to another two years!

Check the second post, Litecoins "birthday" is the 13th Smiley

Yes it is. October 13th 2011.
199  Bitcoin / Hardware wallets / Re: [PREORDER] Trezor: Bitcoin hardware wallet on: October 02, 2013, 03:20:30 PM
It is unfortunate that you are sending the pin matrix to the client. Because then, a hacked client can figure out your pin. If you don't send the pin matrix to the client, then there would be no way for a compromised client to figure out your pin. I think that would be a better solution. Please consider it.

Of course we are not sending the matrix to the client. If we did, it would defeat the whole purpose of it. I meant "indices" instead of "numbers" in this sentence:
Quote
and clicks will be translated to numbers by software

Oh sorry. I see what you mean. The client just displays the 3x3 boxes for you to click on.
200  Bitcoin / Hardware wallets / Re: [PREORDER] Trezor: Bitcoin hardware wallet on: October 02, 2013, 03:15:02 PM
Right now, you'd have to find the spots that have 1,2,3, and 4 and then figure out the index of those spots. In this case it's 9872.

If client has the proper implementation of pin matrix you won't be entering numerical indices (like 9872), but you'll click on blank squares (and clicks will be translated to numbers by software). This will be much more intuitive and so there will be no need for reverse mapping you mentioned.

It is unfortunate that you are sending the pin matrix to the client. Because then, a hacked client can figure out your pin. If you don't send the pin matrix to the client, then there would be no way for a compromised client to figure out your pin. I think that would be a better solution. Please consider it.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 ... 77 »
Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!