What 2.0 Currency will be the most successful?

[nzminer]

Ive listed the main ones i can think of, if there is anything else you would like added, post it below and i will add it

[1713576842]

1713576842

[1713576842]

1713576842

[1713576842]

1713576842

[1713576842]

1713576842

[50cent_rapper]

Few nextgen coins:

Crypti
Skycoin
Bitshares 2.0

[nzminer]

Few nextgen coins:

Crypti
Skycoin
Bitshares 2.0

OK, ill add those, although i cant even see skycoin listed on CMC.

I dont know much about bitshares 2.0, is this going to replace the old bitshares that used the Bitcoin blockchain, or work alongside it?

[bathrobehero]

None of them.

[BurstIncomeAsset]

NXT , in it's current phase it's definitely going to be an interesting playout, if not a winner. But if you look for innovative hard-disk mining, then check BURST.

[r0ach]

Ethereum doesn't have a valid consensus mechanism yet, so nobody can even guess as to it's future.  Before even addressing the other coins, you have to first acknowledge that scaling is important.  A cryptocurrency is basically useless if it requires off-chain transactions to function, especially a 2.0 platform that's supposed to do much more than Bitcoin like operate exchanges.

Out of that list, Bitshares has the best scaling due to DPoS.  NXT, if it ever gets transparent forging working, would have less TPS and slower block times, but better than other coins except Bitshares.  Transparent forging is kind of like recreating DPoS in a more Rube Goldberg approach:

For standard proof of stake, the end game stake scenario results in people having to pool or lease their stake, otherwise there's no point to stake at all.  They're delegating their vote power to determine the longest chain to the pool owner.  The act of doing so results in two things.  First, you've recreated the centralization of PoW pool mining, where most of the blocks are being validated by a handful of people and one out of million being done by some random guy.  Secondly, you've also recreated DPoS, just a less efficient, less decentralized way of doing so.  Most blocks being signed by a few pools vs larger number of block validators in DPoS.

Due to this, I would say Bitshares has highest chance of success, followed by NXT out of the list.

[tokeweed]

Hard to say without being biased.

[jabo38]

Hard to say without being biased.

I am biased because I see real work going on daily behind the scenes with amazing devs and real connections being made outside of the cryptosphere.  NEM

[tokeweed]

Hard to say without being biased.

I am biased because I see real work going on daily behind the scenes with amazing devs and real connections being made outside of the cryptosphere.  NEM

Exactly.

[DecentralizeEconomics]

Out of that list, Bitshares has the best scaling due to DPoS.  NXT, if it ever gets transparent forging working, would have less TPS and slower block times, but better than other coins except Bitshares.  Transparent forging is kind of like recreating DPoS in a more Rube Goldberg approach:

DPoS is just a centralized version of NXT's PoS which was implemented so the Larimers and a select group of manipulators (aka the Communist Chinese Gov) can effectively rig the delegate elections through "approval voting" and control the platform.  Also, Bitshares ridiculous claim of 100k tps requires hardware with 1TB of ram.

[r0ach]

Out of that list, Bitshares has the best scaling due to DPoS.  NXT, if it ever gets transparent forging working, would have less TPS and slower block times, but better than other coins except Bitshares.  Transparent forging is kind of like recreating DPoS in a more Rube Goldberg approach:

DPoS is just a centralized version of NXT's PoS which was implemented so the Larimers and a select group of manipulators (aka the Communist Chinese Gov) can effectively rig the delegate elections through "approval voting" and control the platform.  Also, Bitshares ridiculous claim of 100k tps requires hardware with 1TB of ram.

NXT didn't invent PoS, so you should probably stop lying about that.  NXT will also not be worth buying until someone can demonstrate they can even get transparent forging working on the platform.  I honestly can't believe you're dumb enough to claim Bitshares can't do 100k TPS.  NXT, which would be using an inferior method of deterministic block validation claims similar numbers.  That was also Dan Hughes of Emunie claiming it requires 1TB of RAM, a guy who doesn't even know how Bitshares works.  Tendermint claims 40,000 TPS functionality as well.  You think Tendermint is lying too?  Bitshares can do whatever Tendermint can do or more.  NXT will likely do less than Bitshares while also having slower block times due to the way it's structured.

Bitshares is beating NXT to the market with both high scaling and stable market pegged assets, the two things actually required for crypto to go mainstream.  Nobody wants to hold crypto until it has stability like the dollar.

[patmast3r]

What is the difference between Qora and Qora 2.0 ? Are those 2 distinct projects ? If yes, they chould get their own poll option. If not then there is really no reason to mention both of them. Why mention versions especially if one is obsolete ?

On topic: Didn't vote cuz biased. I do wanna point out that success will not only be determined by technology though. Look at bitcoin. By now vastly inferior technology yet still the main actor in the main stream (if crypto has even penetrated mainstream yet).

[DecentralizeEconomics]

Out of that list, Bitshares has the best scaling due to DPoS.  NXT, if it ever gets transparent forging working, would have less TPS and slower block times, but better than other coins except Bitshares.  Transparent forging is kind of like recreating DPoS in a more Rube Goldberg approach:

DPoS is just a centralized version of NXT's PoS which was implemented so the Larimers and a select group of manipulators (aka the Communist Chinese Gov) can effectively rig the delegate elections through "approval voting" and control the platform.  Also, Bitshares ridiculous claim of 100k tps requires hardware with 1TB of ram.

NXT didn't invent PoS, so you should probably stop lying about that.  NXT will also not be worth buying until someone can demonstrate they can even get transparent forging working on the platform.  I honestly can't believe you're dumb enough to claim Bitshares can't do 100k TPS.  NXT, which would be using an inferior method of deterministic block validation claims similar numbers.  That was also Dan Hughes of Emunie claiming it requires 1TB of RAM, a guy who doesn't even know how Bitshares works.  Tendermint claims 40,000 TPS functionality as well.  You think Tendermint is lying too?  Bitshares can do whatever Tendermint can do or more, and NXT will likely do less than Bitshares while also having slower block times due to the way it's structured.

Bitshares is beating NXT to the market with both high scaling and stable market pegged assets, the two things actually required for crypto to go mainstream.  Nobody wants to hold crypto until it has stability like the dollar.

NXT was first to implement PoS as it's accepted today.  If you were involved in crypto when Bitshares was first being concieved, you'll remember that it was originally going to be PoW.  Only after the Larimers and their backers (aka the Chicom gov) saw the success of NXT did they change Bitshares over to their highly centralized, rigable version of PoS which they termed DPoS.  "Stable market pegged assets"?  Really?  You should stop lying about that.  None of these so called "assets" are stable because they aren't one-hundred percent backed by their physical counterparts.  Anybody with any sense knows that without full covertability you cannot have parity.

Yes, I'm extremely doubtful that Bitshares will be able to get anywhere close to 100ktps without having it centralized on a very small amount of very powerful servers which will of course be beyond the means of affordability for the average person.

[r0ach]

rigable version of PoS which they termed DPoS

I guess I'll post my quote again below since you don't understand how standard PoS works.  It's the same thing as DPoS, just less efficient, lower performance, more Rube Goldberg approach in implementation.  PoW, PoS, and DPoS all use delegation and the act of voting for a delegate.  Anyone who claims otherwise is flat out lying. If you don’t believe me or don’t get it, I don’t have time to try to convince you, sorry:

For standard proof of stake, the end game stake scenario results in people having to pool or lease their stake, otherwise there's no point to stake at all.  They're delegating their vote power to determine the longest chain to the pool owner.  The act of doing so results in two things.  First, you've recreated the centralization of PoW pool mining, where most of the blocks are being validated by a handful of people and one out of million being done by some random guy.  Secondly, you've also recreated DPoS, just a less efficient, less decentralized way of doing so.  Most blocks being signed by a few pools vs larger number of block validators in DPoS.

[testz]

NXT was first to implement PoS as it's accepted today.
...

With all my respect to you as Nxt supporter, PoS was developed by SunnyKing in Peercoin, please don't try to mix everything into one big Nxt heap.
Nxt, BitShares and many others has different PoS implementation but all of them based at "Proof of Stake" idea.

[crypti PR]

Crypti! Open beta of its decentralized application platform starts today!

[bdevelle]

Crypti, clearly.

[DecentralizeEconomics]

rigable version of PoS which they termed DPoS

I guess I'll post my quote again below since you don't understand how standard PoS works.  It's the same thing as DPoS, just less efficient, lower performance, more Rube Goldberg approach in implementation.  PoW, PoS, and DPoS all use delegation and the act of voting for a delegate.  Anyone who claims otherwise is flat out lying. If you don’t believe me or don’t get it, I don’t have time to try to convince you, sorry:

For standard proof of stake, the end game stake scenario results in people having to pool or lease their stake, otherwise there's no point to stake at all.  They're delegating their vote power to determine the longest chain to the pool owner.  The act of doing so results in two things.  First, you've recreated the centralization of PoW pool mining, where most of the blocks are being validated by a handful of people and one out of million being done by some random guy.  Secondly, you've also recreated DPoS, just a less efficient, less decentralized way of doing so.  Most blocks being signed by a few pools vs larger number of block validators in DPoS.

Stake leasing (centralization) isn't required in NXT's PoS.  Delegation (centralization) is required in Bitshares DPoS.  The centralization imposed upon Bitshares' users is deemed "necessary" and "an end game scenario" because of the flawed notion that you espouse that the cost of running a node is unaffordable to the masses.  The reality of the situation is that the costs of running a PoS node is negligible and even more so if you are running a business that utilizes the platform.  Being able to process 100ktps or even 1ktps on any crypto platform is total overkill at this stage in time.  Bitshares is spinning this "DPoS centralization is necessary to increase tx speed" as an excuse to centralize forging away from the home user and into their grasp.  At the time 1ktps or 100ktps is necessary, which will be years and years in the future, consumer grade, retail hardware will most likely be able to handle the load anyway, which will render their "DPoS centralization is necessary" mantra as null and void.

NXT was first to implement PoS as it's accepted today.
...

With all my respect to you as Nxt supporter, PoS was developed by SunnyKing in Peercoin, please don't try to mix everything into one big Nxt heap.
Nxt, BitShares and many others has different PoS implementation but all of them based at "Proof of Stake" idea.

Obviously, PoS started with Peercoin.  There was a reason I ended the sentence with "as it's accepted today".  You should and I know that Peercoin's PoS is inferior to NXT's PoS implementation.

[cryptonit]

the most successful?
depends on definition of successful

if ya ask which one will increase its value at most because of real world service adaption

the answer is clear NEM / XEM

crazy how undervalued and still a insider hint this coin is

[nichlahghe5]

i want next to but have a feeling that bitshares 2.0 will probably be the 2.0 most successful currency. of course assuming that there isnt another 2.0 coin come out in the near future which it no doubt will.