to the OP's title question.
1) i'm yet to see a so called 2.0 platform that's an improvement on bitcoin's blockchain (however there is quiet a few so called copy paste alts that improve on bitcoin funnily enough). just because its original code doesn't automatically make it better.
2) most 2.0 type devs have lost the plot on the entire point of p2p currency ie being an alternative to the banks (eg not trying to create a backend platform for the banks).
also whats the point in being an alternative to the banks if we ourselves become the greedy bankers.
3) if we just jump onto the latest platform plugged as the most 'innovative' all the time, no platform will achieve mass adoption. adoption is way more important then the latest crazy in innovation to sell snake oil.
we are simple trying to create a currency, tis not a mission to mars.
I feel as if I've totally mis-explained my initial post.
As far as your point 1) goes, I don't think what the examples here are improvements on bitcoin. I think in some instances the developers make no effort to claim that, instead focusing on the angle that these projects are just filling in a niche that would be hard to serve on bitcoin itself and allowing speculators to capitalize on that aspect.
I'm not now, and can't envision a future of ever storing wealth on factom for example. It's ludicrous. I don't for a second beleive it will ever become a currency or a commodity with hundreds of thousands of users like bitcoin, and consider it totally plausible for it to vanish off and be valued at next to nothing 2 years to come, just like hundreds of 'revolutionary' alts that came before it. However with my speculator hat on and nothing more I've still "invested" in it and some of the other examples in my post, because unlike say..litecoin we are actually seeing external industry use of these alts.
Granted some of these press releases are just slightly more sexed up variations of the fake press releases popularised by auroracoin, paycoin etc designed to inflate the price temporarily and lure in impressionable
sheep market participants but some of these are sound. "let's commision a research lab and accelerator program to fund VertCoin development" said no bank COO ever. However fintech scene is excited about ETH, work is going on in the background and I've seen it first hand no matter what anyones personal opinion on it is.
as far as your 2) points goes, I think it kind of ties in with what I wrote above. CounterParty, for instance isn't a p2p currency, and doesn't pretend to be. Nobody is paying for coffee with XCP. It's not intended to supplant bitcoin, and that's why it uses the bitcoin blockchain instead of splintering off diverting resources on attempting to secure a secondary chain. It's simply a meta-layer that was designed to deal with the very real limitations of the bitcoin scripting engine
And as 3) goes, I agree and largely prefer to support solutions that I think will are complimentary to bitcoin for exactly that reason. If something is built on bitcoin, or incorporates bitcoin it expands it's user base, increases the user base concerned with securing it, increases it's exposure and ergo overall value proposition
@Newbie / OP
"2.0 platform?"
Sounds like (and is) gay gimmicky BS.
EDIT:
Round them all up that have that title and tell me what they have in common.
this is a new account but I've been around for quite a while. Taken many breaks and just check in occasionally.
So many alts are shit so I understand why people just don't touch them anymore. however I get sick sometimes with people shitting on "gimmicky" alts without truly understanding the reason for their existance or their use cases or giving realistic arguments against them.
A few years ago I had a simple use case: I wanted to use the blockchain to create a "database" of sorts.
why use the blockchain instead of a normal database? In a nutshell; it's a transparent, globally shared, self-replicating, immutable ledger. It enables open, peer-to-peer, real-time settlement without the need for financial intermediaries. Nothing else quite like it.
After experiencing more exchange hacks and scams than I ever imagined I felt nautious and completely exasperated with the state of the bitcoin ecosystem. Mtgox debacle topped it all off because I couldn't beleive anyone was still using gox after the first hack Ironically this decentralised currencies biggest pitfall was users trusting centralized parties with their private keys. A shambles. Having been around in the early days, and going back and re-discovering early markets code in the reference client I don't beleive this is what satoshi ever intended.
I realised that using CounterParty's Protocol-based trustless escrow possible to to create a token, to distribute this token to users and allow the users to send this token to each other completely
without counterparty risk. If a user wants to exchange one token for another token they are able to atomically swap via a decentralized, deterministic order matching engine. Perhaps I'm dreamng big but I think the implications for such a thing is potentially huge.
At the time (and today) that was NOT possible with any other solution. Literally didn't exist.
I heard individuals in the past say why do we need an altcoin to create a token, when we can use colored coins, without realising you can create a token using counterparty with bitcoin and nothing more. then people say well why do you need an altcoin for any element? AFAIK nobody has a way to swap tokens in a decentralized manner without a proxy coin. All this sidechains talk is unproven but should it become proven and real, counterparty would too be useless. I'm only investing in it now because although clearly next to nobody uses it right now and it has plenty of pitfalls, it exists and is real, and I think it has certain applications. I have seen external money back those same assertions too, therefore I see a profit potential. Same story with ETH. Years ago that wasn't true of anything aside from bitcoin proper.
[more bullshit press releases that talk but don't explain why their technology is flawed]
Are there more fools to buy this shit and lose their money, as they are about to by buying ETH at nosebleed prices.
Hi Anonymint.
As an example, just pulling up an old link here from 2 years ago:
http://counterparty.io/news/introducing-fully-trustless-games-on-blockchain/ (do you think this is total bullshit, or actually something interesting?)
Read quite a few of your posts before but don't believe you've ever gone into depth on Counterparty. would genuinely be interested to hear your views on why you think it is flawed.
Does it bring nothing new to the table?
