A lot of people do still use local currencies though, so you might as well set up to only use one payment processing system and have that be one that just gives you the Crunch Berries you prefer and insulates you from everyone else's cocoa puffs, dollars, yen, francs, or whatever the heck they use.
-MarkM-
I can't tell, are you still arguing for Ripple? If so, I consider BTC that payment processor. I think that Ripple is just trying to add an extra layer of complexity that, frankly, won't work. |
|
|
|
The world has dozens of conventional currencies, mostly with language/local politics providing natural borders. And you're right, most people (non-enthusiasts) don't care enough to trade on forex markets unless they have to.
That's why I think this analogy breaks down. While conventional currencies has the limitation of localization and a specific area of use, BTC doesn't. The fact that when I go to France I would have a hard time using USD and, thus, Euros would have value to me. The Internet is the Internet. I know some people will say that different segments of the Internet could use BTC while others LTC and the rest Durpcoin or whatever. This would actually devalue all the coins. One, it negates the "no inflation" aspect of bitcoin because, well, these new coins all create de facto inflation. They are all pumping out infinite digital coins that some people accept. Second, it negates the "low fees" aspect of bitcoin as you'd have to pay an exchange somewhere down the line to just transfer your BTC to some other coin. Finally, it negates the "easy to use" as the fact that i just had to explain all this in a tl;dr paragraph proves it thus. The final argument is then "Well, you can just accept both!" But why?! Why accept two when I can just accept BTC and get all the same benefits without any of the hassle I mentioned above? |
|
|
|
Okay then here's re the fifteen wallets:
Ripple.
No one need care what currencies other people use, they just pay with what they use and get paid with what they use, automagically.
-MarkM-
Ripple is a terrible idea for a multitude of reasons. Even then, it still doesn't do anything to address the issue we're debating. No one would give me an IOU for a box of stale Crunch Berries even if I claimed it was the currency I wanted to use. |
|
|
|
Thats incorrect, it has lots of stuff backing it.
The order books on umpteen exchanges, for one.
That alone adds up to a whole lot of dollars, yen, litecoins, ppcoins, botcoins britcoins, GBP, etc etc etc.
You might as well say dollars have no value, or GBP has no value.
You might be right, but people go on buying bread, hookers and blow with the stuff regardless of your 'wisdom'.
-MarkM-
Wow, you kinda just stop reading and or didn't really think before you posted. I'll wait for someone to actually respond to what I wrote. |
|
|
|
4% female users are really very little. If Bitcoin system would became more “user friendly” than woman will start to use it more and more.
Regards, Inge (4%)
Why? Aren't women as smart as men?  It's more likely how men on the internet react to women. A few months back, I must of said something that led a large group of people on this forum to believe I was a woman (I'm still not sure what). I know this because I woke up one morning to a flood of PMs asking to date me and asking for tit pics. Some of them very obviously spent that entire night reading every post I'd made on the forum up until that point. It was super creepy, and I'm not even a woman! |
|
|
|
|
Someones wire transfer must of gone through. Some big buys happening.
|
|
|
|
This is absolutely correct. No one will want to participate in peer-2-peer currency, or whatever phrase you like, if they know any child can make an "alt-chain" whenever they want that can effectively devalue their savings.
The field of alt-chain coins is littered with dead bodies. If one can survive, something must be done right. You too can create a alt-chain and try to devalue my savings  ... let's see how that goes. Well, thus far NO alt-chain has survived. If you think LTC has already achieved any success level outside of the equivalent of a penny-stock you be crazy. I'm talking about IF LTC reaches any main stream ears. People will be able to extrapolate and come to the logical conclusion. Again, LTC offers nothing new or interesting over BTC. It is just in the midst of a PR surge by a few people wanting to get the price up a bit so they can swap back to BTC. If you think the faster-but-less-secure confirmations is the reason to go to LTC, then explain why you won't dump and switch to the next coin that is even faster than ltc. Or dump and switch to the next alt-coin that is even faster than the last? Bitcoin is FOSS. The "value pie" only has a limited size and any investment has the potential to inflate/devalue any other investment, as long as there is even a tiny amount of liquidity between them. E.g.: even Facebook stock could divert some US dollars that might otherwise be spent on physical Silver. What a lot of people seem to be hoping for is that Bitcoin will provide an enormous seigniorage opportunity for all us "early adopters" to basically 'steal' wealth from other stores of value. I.e.: some people hope that Bitcoin will pop other people's bubbles to make more room for their own. I think the ZH crowd refer to it as being "high on Hopium". This is what makes Bitcoin sound so stupid and naive to outsiders! However, Bitcoin's real power lies in the fact that it can be freely copied/cloned/emulated/etc... until perhaps, one sunny day, a robust ecosystem will develop where most of the time it doesn't even matter what policy a particular currency/alt-coin/fork employs because there are so many of them that it averages-out. I think the advantage in Bitcoin being FOSS isn't that infinite clones can be created, but rather the the public can see how it works and that it cannot have secret changes made to it the can weaken the system. I can't follow the logic that having a ton of alt-coins somehow make everything even out. No one will want to try and manage 15 different wallets, on different exchanges, and watch the prices of each as one temporarily becomes more popular. No one except wanna be day-traders at least. If you're goal is to just create a trading mini-game for yourself with no RL consequences, then yea, that'd work. If your goal is for our little digital currency to be actually useful, used, and valued then this game is counter-productive. I think an apt analogy is aluminium. When first used, it was very rare and very very valuable. That was until a way to create aluminium from aluminum oxide and the value plummeted as the potential supply exploded. Aluminium only has value now for its actual, practical uses. BTC does not have the advantage of having a particle use. LTC, at best, is attempting to prove all the haters right when they say "BTC has no value as there is nothing backing it." |
|
|
|
This is absolutely correct. No one will want to participate in peer-2-peer currency, or whatever phrase you like, if they know any child can make an "alt-chain" whenever they want that can effectively devalue their savings.
The field of alt-chain coins is littered with dead bodies. If one can survive, something must be done right. You too can create a alt-chain and try to devalue my savings ... let's see how that goes. Well, thus far NO alt-chain has survived. If you think LTC has already achieved any success level outside of the equivalent of a penny-stock you be crazy. I'm talking about IF LTC reaches any main stream ears. People will be able to extrapolate and come to the logical conclusion. Again, LTC offers nothing new or interesting over BTC. It is just in the midst of a PR surge by a few people wanting to get the price up a bit so they can swap back to BTC. If you think the faster-but-less-secure confirmations is the reason to go to LTC, then explain why you won't dump and switch to the next coin that is even faster than ltc. Or dump and switch to the next alt-coin that is even faster than the last? |
|
|
|
Unless it also brought in new players or increased interest from existing players. It's all about supply and demand. That's true, but I think promoting the adoption of new bitcoin-like blockchains might reduce interest, because it would undermine interest in holding bitcoin-like-currency in general. This is absolutely correct. No one will want to participate in peer-2-peer currency, or whatever phrase you like, if they know any child can make an "alt-chain" whenever they want that can effectively devalue their savings. |
|
|
|
Of course, that is assuming we have gotten past the "I don't believe in a healthy competition-driven market, and bitcoin is the only coin that will ever exists, ever, in the entire future of the entire universe, for ever and ever, because I said so. *proceed to flame alt-coins b/c they are just so little and volatile and easy to make fun of*"
Uh oh. Strawman detected. Please learn the real debate. |
|
|
|
Apologies if I made an error there mccorvic, there are hundreds of anti-LTC dead bodies lying by the wayside over the last 12 months so excuse me if I can't remember exactly what you said  Eh, maybe you mistook one of my claims that if LTC reaches any REAL modicum of success, i.e. more than just emo-sad GPU miners use it, then the whole SYSTEM will crash. BTC and LTC both. Though I don't know if I specifically ever used the word crash. |
|
|
|
I wonder if/how much the process will change with the coinlab move. |
|
|
|
This is literally the worst analogy I've heard yet. Congrats.
Better the worst analogy than the worst prediction: you have been saying LTC will crash for months now. Hows that working out for you? Lol. I haven't said LTC would crash. I've just said it was a terrible idea. Now LTCers are just making stuff up about me because they can't argue a use for their BS. |
|
|
|
Any details? btc-e is down due to database issue.
Seems to be up for me. Litecoin at 0.0091btc or $0.41. That scam couldn't last forever. "scam" to you is "i didnt buy so i'm going to cry about it" That's what LTC is. "I didn't buy BTC, so I'm crying about it." |
|
|
|
LTC isn't silver, BTC isn't gold. If LTC had come first it would beat BTC just because of its transaction speeds, but it wasn't. So now we have to deal with the fact that both exist, but we only need one.
Gold and silver on the other hand existed way before humans, and will outlast us. They have different reasons for their value than LTC and BTC do. I refuse to accept this analogy.
Edit: Not to mention the fact that LTC only has value to speculators because of how BTC turned out.
Quoting for emphasis. I have no doubt that LTC supporters won't actually, you know, refute your points. They'll either just wait a bit then repeat "Oh, so BMW comes out with a new car it devalues all other cars?! Derp" or "BTC GOLD! LTC SILVER" forever and ever. They will also refuse to answer why we should bother with LTC when we know that they'll eventually move onto some other coin and spam us up in here about THAT one. I wish they'd just all go to ltcderptalk.org and leave us alone. Heh. |
|
|
|
Litecoin and other POW Bitcoin-variants are just new bitcoin blockchains with new names and a couple of superficial changes to how it works. They are an attempt to increase the bitcoin-like-currency money supply, which hurts peer-to-peer currency as a whole by reducing the integrity of the scarcity of its money supply. Without supply scarcity, a currency can't hold value, which makes it less useful.
It's always nice to see someone else who gets it. So world of warcraft gold and eve online currency and second life lindens and such all become more and more valueless as more and more such things come into existence? This is literally the worst analogy I've heard yet. Congrats. |
|
|
|
LTC is to BTC as Silver is to Gold.
Repeating this doesn't make it any more true. Watch. McDonald's is good for your heart! Burger King is the preferred meal for athletes! Dairy Queen Blizzards is a low-calorie alternative to a banana. |
|
|
|
Litecoin and other POW Bitcoin-variants are just new bitcoin blockchains with new names and a couple of superficial changes to how it works. They are an attempt to increase the bitcoin-like-currency money supply, which hurts peer-to-peer currency as a whole by reducing the integrity of the scarcity of its money supply. Without supply scarcity, a currency can't hold value, which makes it less useful.
It's always nice to see someone else who gets it. |
|
|
|
Well, LTC was invented for people who missed out on the BTC explosion.. Heck, it even said that on litecoin.org until recently..
But so far it's actually working!
For people who missed out on LTC, there's Nova coin. Then, for people who miss out on Nova coin I've already created (and personally hold 100,000 units of) SuperCoin. Of course, I'm working on MegaCoin for people who miss out on that. Oh wait, this is all a terrible idea. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
