Antonopoulos Supports, "Classic, Core, ETH, Unlimited, Litecoin, & Everything"

[MicroGuy]

Breaking: Andreas Antonopoulos supports, "Classic, Core, Ethereum, Unlimited, Litecoin, and Everything."



~~

@aantonop: Classic? Core? or Ethereum?

Andreas Antonopoulos [12:49 AM] Classic and Core and Ethereum and Unlimited and Litecoin and everything.The idea that there must be only one is a throwback to national moneys and monopolies of the past. We live in a multicurrency world of choice. That also applies to implementations of consensus. We ​can​ have more than one coexist and compete. It's healthy

~~

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/428d0x/antonopoulus_i_support_both_core_and_classic/
Source: https://bitcoincore.slack.com/archives/general/p1453506630025326

[MicroGuy]

~~



~~

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/428d0x/antonopoulus_i_support_both_core_and_classic/cz8gwo4

[gentlemand]

I recall him talking about how every school kid on Earth will eventually issue their own currency. I for one would not accept Tyronecoin if I was selling him some crack. I'd want something that the majority places a value on.

[jonald_fyookball]

~~



~~

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/428d0x/antonopoulus_i_support_both_core_and_classic/cz8gwo4

AA: we can everything...core, classic, litecoin

REDITOR: NO!  ONLY CORE!

 

[Yakamoto]

I recall him talking about how every school kid on Earth will eventually issue their own currency. I for one would not accept Tyronecoin if I was selling him some crack. I'd want something that the majority places a value on.

I think one way you could look at that is that the currency would correspond directly to the value of the person, or the value the person can provide.

I am actually interested in seeing an experiment based around this concept. I am confident, however, that all the value would gravitate to one person's currency, and all the other currencies would be small mediums of exchange for individual people.

That or an entrepreneur would aim to take the largest market share as quick as possible.



I do agree, however, that individual currencies will not be very valuable in the future, and will likely have no place in society.

[MicroGuy]

I agree that supporting a variety of reputable digital currencies is a good thing. We need multiple blockchains to mitigate the risks of having a single point of failure in Bitcoin. It's true, Altcoins provide yet another layer of decentralization.

However, Bitcoin is also a "consumer brand" and creating three different variations is going to cause dilution, and make things extremely confusing for exchanges, merchants, pool operators, and end users.

So while part of Antonopoulos' statement is correct, in my mind there can only be one authentic Bitcoin. Supporting both Classic and Core is supporting Bitcoin's ultimate destruction.

[nakedbitcoins]

I believe he said there will be 10,000 alt coins ?

[MicroGuy]

I believe he said there will be 10,000 alt coins ?

Yes, there will be - even more.

Alternative currencies will become much like webpages are today in terms of valuations. Some will be mere parked pages, others perpetually under construction, some pornographic, all ranges of colors and flavors of complexity. And there will be a few Googles and Facebooks in the bunch as well.

When the people of this planet wake up to the Ponzi scheme that's been perpetrated upon them by the central banks for decades, they won't want US Dollars, Euros, or Yen. The people will demand digital currencies.

[foggyb]

I believe he said there will be 10,000 alt coins ?

10,000? I'd guess there must be 1000 already. But I believe altcoins will find their place in many exciting ways.

[Kprawn]

In a way I agree with what he is saying.... Alt coins is the breeding ground for innovation and Bitcoin can adopt and change ANY of this innovation, if it needed to do that. We

should embrace all Alt coins under one umbrella and invest in what we want. How boring will this technology be, if we only had one coin? Imagine walking into a Sweets Shop, and

you only had the option to buy one type of sweet.  Just give everyone a change to shine and everyone a option to choose. Our task must be to sort the bad from the good.

[Amph]

well all those fork are basically the same they aim to increase the capacity, so he may have a point there, but if he love even every single alt, then i'm not i agreement with this

top 10 of those cracoin can still be loved, since they are quite strong, still i would avoid litecoin, seems to aim only at p&d

[BillyBobZorton]

I understand his position, Andreas is a nice guy and believes in people choosing what's better for them, unfortunately most people are stupid and don't understand the details, and the big blocks and cheaper fees are way easier to sell than some technical stuff about the node decentralization aspect.

Lets just hope things turn out ok and we stay with Core.

[xdrpx]

He's on the right track with that he has said. Supporting multiple digital currencies creates diversity and the ability to trade and exchange among them. I felt he was being supportive of any changes and opinions as a fork to Bitcoin core, so everything holds good for now.

[MicroGuy]

I understand his position, Andreas is a nice guy and believes in people choosing what's better for them, unfortunately most people are stupid and don't understand the details, and the big blocks and cheaper fees are way easier to sell than some technical stuff about the node decentralization aspect.

Lets just hope things turn out ok and we stay with Core.

This video explains why Core is so stubbornly sticking with 1MB blocks. This overly-complex Blockstream scheme will have far less demand if Core hard forks to 2MB.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jE_elgnIw3M

Maybe these guys will eventually decide to do the right thing and, "put the needs of the wider bitcoin community ahead of their own personal Blockstream ambitions?"

[unamis76]

I agree with Antonopoulos when he says that all these ideas and suggestions of improving cryptocurrencies and Bitcoin in general are good... But saying that they all should co-exist is going quite far. That could go both ways, either the biggest one cannibalizes the smaller ones or they all co-exist and people will get confused. The second way is something truly undesirable.

~~



~~

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/428d0x/antonopoulus_i_support_both_core_and_classic/cz8gwo4

Antonopoulos isn't a man of conflict indeed, but the fact that you support one thing does not mean you're anti another thing...

[QuestionAuthority]

Andreas is the ultimate politically correct Bitcoiner. This is just his way of not having to choose a camp and with that choice pissing someone off. There's nothing wrong with being neutral but he does it a little too much for my taste. Of course he knows all these different versions of the blocksize solution can't coexist so he's pandering to the entire community.

[jonald_fyookball]

Andreas is the ultimate politically correct Bitcoiner. This is just his way of not having to choose a camp and with that choice pissing someone off. There's nothing wrong with being neutral but he does it a little too much for my taste. Of course he knows all these different versions of the blocksize solution can't coexist so he's pandering to the entire community.

Well, to be precise, they could coexist but probably only one version of Bitcoin would get the lion's share of adoption and would get to call itself Bitcoin.
I think you're right: A.A. knows this... and I think perhaps he's saying that the market should decide (because it will!) ...but yeah he's
definitely remaining neutral.  I don't blame him. 

[bri912678]

Andreas is the ultimate politically correct Bitcoiner. This is just his way of not having to choose a camp and with that choice pissing someone off. There's nothing wrong with being neutral but he does it a little too much for my taste. Of course he knows all these different versions of the blocksize solution can't coexist so he's pandering to the entire community.

Well, to be precise, they could coexist but probably only one version of Bitcoin would get the lion's share of adoption and would get to call itself Bitcoin.
I think you're right: A.A. knows this... and I think perhaps he's saying that the market should decide (because it will!) ...but yeah he's
definitely remaining neutral.  I don't blame him. 

The's not exactly decisive, but some devs have had death threats over their support for a particular flavor of wallet, so he's playing safe and supporting both everything and nothing. He could have stayed silent, or said he was neutral, but now he can say he supported whichever wallet wins after its won.

[MicroGuy]

The's not exactly decisive, but some devs have had death threats over their support for a particular flavor of wallet, so he's playing safe and supporting both everything and nothing. He could have stayed silent, or said he was neutral, but now he can say he supported whichever wallet wins after its won.

This rings true. But how does that stance help bitcoin, how does that attitude contribute to the common good, how does that position serve anyone but himself?

[rizzlarolla]

I believe he said there will be 10,000 alt coins ?

snip...
When the people of this planet wake up to the Ponzi scheme that's been perpetrated upon them by the central banks for decades, they won't want US Dollars, Euros, or Yen. The people will demand digital currencies.

If the people of the planet adopted the 1000 shitcoins we now have, their demand for digital cash will be fleeting imo.
The 1000 shitcoins we have are MOSTLY worse than the sick dollar.

This rings true. But how does that stance help bitcoin, how does that attitude contribute to the common good, how does that position serve anyone but himself?

Refreshing to see someone not trying to control every aspect of bitcoin, not trench digging, not panicking. Not thinking only his camp are right.