Bitcoin versus Ether: the people difference is everything

[Jasad]

Technology? Supply? Contracts? Let's be frank. I don't give a damn. The microwave oven remains the perfect example of my point. I know how to use but I have no need to understand how it works. Nor do I care.

What matters is people.

BTC is ungoverned. We've seen that the BTC Core team is unable to fix problems (or way to slow). Will the foundation make a comeback? Satoshi Nakamoto? I would have liked Craig Wright to be Satoshi, he would make a nice ambassador.

On the Ether side, I see Vitalik Buterin who is smart, young, very knowledgeable, so much that I trust his abilities to find and implement solutions if a problem arise. I have no doubt the scalability issue BTC's facing would have been fixed months ago if he was running BTC.

So I'm afraid Ether will pass BTC some day, not because of better tech, but because of better and stronger leadership.

so,why must be afraid?if we relize that now etherum have better developer and unlimited supply,one that make us worry is etherum will not stay so long as bitcoin done,and i wish etherum price will never reach like bitcoin.

[Patatas]

Well if thats the case i will stay at bitcoin even they are hi-tech to fix the problem in the future.. and i think they cant also handle the same issue of bitcoin when they are in place as bitcoin..

1.You're a signature spammer.
2.What problems are you talking about ? Block size ? Generic Mining ?You simply can't compare bitcoin and ETH on their technical sides.Bitcoin is literally used as first priority for transactions.ETH is barely a currency,just a "figure" to implement DAO using the blockchain which is a prodigal son of Satoshi.

no matter what happen bitcoin is already use as payment in many store.. and i believe bitcoin issue will be resolve again just like before..
Mind elaborating a bit on the issues?

Also i just notice why many people are complaining about ethereum.. ethereum still altcoin.. don't discuss here because this is for bitcoin discussion..

Don't know where that is coming from as the topic strictly has the keyword bitcoin in it and this is not a typical bitcoin FUD so the topic is right there where is suppose to be.
[/quote]

so,why must be afraid?if we relize that now etherum have better developer and unlimited supply,one that make us worry is etherum will not stay so long as bitcoin done,and i wish etherum price will never reach like bitcoin.

Who said ETH has unlimited supply ? That's a damn myth,do look at the factual numbers on their website.ETH will be around as long as people are interested in DAPPS ,don't worry ,financial wise,its never taking over bitcoin as  they're not the same page.

[pooya87]

Technology? Supply? Contracts? Let's be frank. I don't give a damn. The microwave oven remains the perfect example of my point. I know how to use but I have no need to understand how it works. Nor do I care.

What matters is people.

i agree with this part. the end user doesn't care about how bitcoin works, they only care that it does work and as long as the come to the conclusion that it is safe and useful that is enough.

although you shouldn't forget that there are still some things that are important when you want to invest your money and purchase those coins in first place. for example in case of ETH two things bother me that i would never go for using it: 1) it has already a massive supply which is probably(?) endless too 2) it is controlled by those who have the largest amount from the start (before the launch) so dump at any second is feared.

BTC is ungoverned. We've seen that the BTC Core team is unable to fix problems (or way to slow). Will the foundation make a comeback? Satoshi Nakamoto? I would have liked Craig Wright to be Satoshi, he would make a nice ambassador.

i think CW was too shady to represent bitcoin and he had some legal issues also.

[Supercrypt]

Okay. I don't see the point of this thread other than promoting Ether which is kind of.. shouldn't be in this section.
I do not see just yet the possibility of ether passing the value of bitcoins as people see bitcoins something that can already be integrated in the real world shops.

[Evildrum]

A decentralized crypto-currenBTCcy is not supposed to have any kind of leader whatsoever.

Congratulations Lauda, you've been the only one to answer my point. When I mean leader, I don't mean someone to give rules, nor to tell us what to do, but someone to fix problems. We may imagine that some hacker tomorrow, finds a vulnerability and writes a virus to attack all miners. Just like a city needs a fire department service, BTC needs someone able to fix any problem which may arise, and I say that's why so many people like about Ether: there's a guy in charge.

You had a point! That was a complete ramble on nothing and you claim Lauda understood it?
Go read the rest of the response back to you,it really sounds like you where understood!
If the majority of people misunderstand the point,you failed to project it in a functional way to appeal to the masses.

[Pierre 2]

As we see strong competitiveness between Ether and Btc, I still think btc is unbeatable in its own game.
But for cryptocurrency system strong ethereum is even better for btc itself.

[bitdumper]

What is the problem with bitcoins. In daily life i never used and felt the need of the terms described in the Ether manifesto. I am quite happy with bitcoin. As user has increased, there is a competition and you have to pay a strong fee to get included. There is no problem in bitcoin other than people using low fee.

[mindrust]

Eth will die sooner than you think. Get ready for massive dump fest in a couple days. All of those locked eth will be unleashed on exchanges very soon and i will be watching it from the front seats, and most importantly "for free". God help eth holders.

[MingLee]

Ethereum will have it's uses, but the thing everyone here is overlooking is that no-one aside from those already interested in cryptocurrencies have any idea what Ethereum is. Ethereum already heavily favors coding and those who have experience with program development, and thus it is already harsh for an outsider to get involved and start earning their own Ethereum. Bitcoin, on the other hand, allows for anyone interested in mining to pick up mining hardware and start mining, assuming they have an easy-to-find client to run the hardware if they don't know how to set it up.

As for the people, a cryptocurrency shouldn't have a core developer or someone who has massive effects on the existence of the cryptocurrency, where the crypto would slow down or be majorly affected if the person was to not have any interaction with it. Bitcoin developers exist to improve, Ethereum's dev is basically the only person with influence to my knowledge.

Ethereum and Bitcoin will compete, but the thing is Ethereum just can't maintain a high value and drops off after buy-ins, often fairly severely. It can be the silver of cryptocurrencies, but it will be massively difficult to dethrone Bitcoin as it stands.

[Lauda]

Congratulations Lauda, you've been the only one to answer my point. When I mean leader, I don't mean someone to give rules, nor to tell us what to do, but someone to fix problems. We may imagine that some hacker tomorrow, finds a vulnerability and writes a virus to attack all miners. Just like a city needs a fire department service, BTC needs someone able to fix any problem which may arise, and I say that's why so many people like about Ether: there's a guy in charge.

You're not talking about much more that developers IMO. Technically you could say that Wladimir is in 'charge' because he is the maintainer of the Bitcoin Core project on Github. However, there are plenty of developers working on Bitcoin. Exactly how do you imagine this 'guy in charge'; what would be the difference between that system and the current one that we have? We can't really compare to ETH since "our Vitalik Buterin" has disappeared long ago.

Exactly, the lack of a single entity to put pressure on is a huge advantage. There are many thousands of leaders in Bitcoin.

If we have learned anything in the recent times, it is that this is not true.

If the majority of people misunderstand the point,you failed to project it in a functional way to appeal to the masses.

Maybe you should put more thought into reading and analyzing before rushing to make a post.

I am quite happy with bitcoin. As user has increased, there is a competition and you have to pay a strong fee to get included.

Apparently some people think that it is economically viable for the Bitcoin network to be practically free to use, which is a completely irrational view of the presented system. Nothing is free.
Update 1: Another off-topic post.

[cjmoles]

I don't think that a suitable comparison could be made between the Ethereum Network and the Bitcoin Network....It's not a one or the other proposition.  Bitcoin buys ether, and ether fuels D'Apps on the Ethereum Network. 

The combined participation of the community has the largest vote in both cases.  What makes the Ethereum Network attractive is the number and quality of developers contributing to network productivity(see: http://dapps.ethercasts.com/ )  And what makes the Bitcoin Network attractive is its robustness and market capital due to it being the first one to enter the arena....However, it's not a competition, its a relationship.

[Evildrum]

If the majority of people misunderstand the point,you failed to project it in a functional way to appeal to the masses.

Maybe you should put more thought into reading and analyzing before rushing to make a post.

Enough. You continue to make these allegations against me based on your own perceptions.
Have written to you to show me respect and I would offer the same but you continue with these allegations that hold no weight when tested.

The thread speaks for its self and yet I am wrong because Lauda and countryfee understand each other,well the majority here totally do not get the point. But I rushed this post too.

[countryfree]

I don't think that a suitable comparison could be made between the Ethereum Network and the Bitcoin Network....

Okay. I don't see the point of this thread other than promoting Ether which is kind of...

I'm not promoting Ether nor comparing it to BTC. I'm promoting and supporting good governance, which BTC badly needs.

Congratulations Lauda, you've been the only one to answer my point. When I mean leader, I don't mean someone to give rules, nor to tell us what to do, but someone to fix problems. We may imagine that some hacker tomorrow, finds a vulnerability and writes a virus to attack all miners. Just like a city needs a fire department service, BTC needs someone able to fix any problem which may arise, and I say that's why so many people like about Ether: there's a guy in charge.

You're not talking about much more that developers IMO. Technically you could say that Wladimir is in 'charge' because he is the maintainer of the Bitcoin Core project on Github. However, there are plenty of developers working on Bitcoin. Exactly how do you imagine this 'guy in charge'; what would be the difference between that system and the current one that we have? We can't really compare to ETH since "our Vitalik Buterin" has disappeared long ago.

Yes, he's gone and that's sad. Gavin Andresen isn't the leader anymore, Mike Hearn has left too, and it's very true there are many other developers but there isn't a single one who has any kind of influence over the others. So it's as decentralized as it can get. I see BTC as a large ship with plenty of sailors but no captain. Some want a hard fork, some others a soft fork. Some want no changes, some others want a 2MB block size, while others want a 8MB block size. If we want BTC to grow and get better, if we want solutions to be found if a problem arises, we will need some kind of organization.

[AgentofCoin]

I don't think that a suitable comparison could be made between the Ethereum Network and the Bitcoin Network....

Okay. I don't see the point of this thread other than promoting Ether which is kind of...

I'm not promoting Ether nor comparing it to BTC. I'm promoting and supporting good governance, which BTC badly needs.

Congratulations Lauda, you've been the only one to answer my point. When I mean leader, I don't mean someone to give rules, nor to tell us what to do, but someone to fix problems. We may imagine that some hacker tomorrow, finds a vulnerability and writes a virus to attack all miners. Just like a city needs a fire department service, BTC needs someone able to fix any problem which may arise, and I say that's why so many people like about Ether: there's a guy in charge.

You're not talking about much more that developers IMO. Technically you could say that Wladimir is in 'charge' because he is the maintainer of the Bitcoin Core project on Github. However, there are plenty of developers working on Bitcoin. Exactly how do you imagine this 'guy in charge'; what would be the difference between that system and the current one that we have? We can't really compare to ETH since "our Vitalik Buterin" has disappeared long ago.

Yes, he's gone and that's sad. Gavin Andresen isn't the leader anymore, Mike Hearn has left too, and it's very true there are many other developers but there isn't a single one who has any kind of influence over the others. So it's as decentralized as it can get. I see BTC as a large ship with plenty of sailors but no captain. Some want a hard fork, some others a soft fork. Some want no changes, some others want a 2MB block size, while others want a 8MB block size. If we want BTC to grow and get better, if we want solutions to be found if a problem arises, we will need some kind of organization.

Solutions to problems that arise are implemented almost immediately.
We do not need leadership or organizations to do that.

A leader in Bitcoin is an oxymoron.

I think what you really want is a PR Firm.
Ether is mostly PR.

[zimmah]

Technology? Supply? Contracts? Let's be frank. I don't give a damn. The microwave oven remains the perfect example of my point. I know how to use but I have no need to understand how it works. Nor do I care.

What matters is people.

BTC is ungoverned. We've seen that the BTC Core team is unable to fix problems (or way to slow). Will the foundation make a comeback? Satoshi Nakamoto? I would have liked Craig Wright to be Satoshi, he would make a nice ambassador.

On the Ether side, I see Vitalik Buterin who is smart, young, very knowledgeable, so much that I trust his abilities to find and implement solutions if a problem arise. I have no doubt the scalability issue BTC's facing would have been fixed months ago if he was running BTC.

So I'm afraid Ether will pass BTC some day, not because of better tech, but because of better and stronger leadership.

the fact that one guy 'runs' ether makes it centralized, and therefore it's not better than fiat.

[Bit_Happy]

Bitcoin versus Doge: the people difference is everything

See what I did there?

Yes I see!
I have met so many wonderful doggie people, there is no doubt about future success. 

[bitcoin_bagholder]

I don't think that a suitable comparison could be made between the Ethereum Network and the Bitcoin Network....

Okay. I don't see the point of this thread other than promoting Ether which is kind of...

I'm not promoting Ether nor comparing it to BTC. I'm promoting and supporting good governance, which BTC badly needs.

Congratulations Lauda, you've been the only one to answer my point. When I mean leader, I don't mean someone to give rules, nor to tell us what to do, but someone to fix problems. We may imagine that some hacker tomorrow, finds a vulnerability and writes a virus to attack all miners. Just like a city needs a fire department service, BTC needs someone able to fix any problem which may arise, and I say that's why so many people like about Ether: there's a guy in charge.

You're not talking about much more that developers IMO. Technically you could say that Wladimir is in 'charge' because he is the maintainer of the Bitcoin Core project on Github. However, there are plenty of developers working on Bitcoin. Exactly how do you imagine this 'guy in charge'; what would be the difference between that system and the current one that we have? We can't really compare to ETH since "our Vitalik Buterin" has disappeared long ago.

Yes, he's gone and that's sad. Gavin Andresen isn't the leader anymore, Mike Hearn has left too, and it's very true there are many other developers but there isn't a single one who has any kind of influence over the others. So it's as decentralized as it can get. I see BTC as a large ship with plenty of sailors but no captain. Some want a hard fork, some others a soft fork. Some want no changes, some others want a 2MB block size, while others want a 8MB block size. If we want BTC to grow and get better, if we want solutions to be found if a problem arises, we will need some kind of organization.

Eh, you sure about that? I'd be willing to bet that Greg Maxwell has lots of influence over many devs, including some prominent ones.

[Divinespark]

Horses for courses. Ether and BTC have different purposes at the moment. Ether is better for contracts. BTC is a better medium of exchange and store of value. Both can co-exist. Ether has more to prove.

[Herbert2020]

it will all come down to the use cases and how trusted the coin and its developers are. so far all i have seen from ethereum was hype after hype and then when you think it is over another hype just to pump and dump the coin like hundreds of other coins before it.

[Kakmakr]

Okay. I don't see the point of this thread other than promoting Ether which is kind of.. shouldn't be in this section.
I do not see just yet the possibility of ether passing the value of bitcoins as people see bitcoins something that can already be integrated in the real world shops.

Exactly, the more attention we give to this, positive or negative will give it traction and free publicity. The only good thing is, we can debunk the myths and hype that are built around it. Ether is just another ALT coin gunning for the top position and we should treat it like that.

This whole thread should be moved to the Alt coin section. ^hmmmmm^