Anyone Thinking Of Dumping Bitcoin In Favour of Litecoin?

[coblee]

Increased hash rate == increased network security.

Also, litecoin is certainly not at all immune to ASIC.

I don't agree that "Increased hash rate == increased network security". When ASIC bitcoin mining is widely available, if you have the same number of people mining, the network won't be more secure just because the hashrate is higher. It's all about how much $ it takes for an attacker to come up with enough hashrate to 51% the network. ASICs might eventually increase the network hashrate 50x but that does not mean the network is 50x more secure if it costs the same amount of money for someone to successfully attack the network.

Take for example, if someone found a way to optimize the miner software to be 10x better hashrate and it works on CPUs, GPUs, FPGAs, and ASICs. Then all of the sudden, the next day EVERYONE uses the new miner software and the network hashrate jumps from 50 thahs/s to 500 thash/s. Is the network now ten times more secure?

If that strawman is the best example you can come up with to play devil's advocate, then no. But do you really think that a network composed of <1% of the global GPUs is invulnerable to a virus attack? Bitcoin was nearly attacked this way, but the perps instead decided to profit. Maybe LTC will not be so lucky.

Where did I say Litecoin is invulnerable to attacks? If huge botnet that uses CPU and GPU can successfully attack Litecoin. But botnet operators likely just want to make money, so as like Bitcoin, they will just add to the hashrate and help secure Litecoin.

[cbeast]

Increased hash rate == increased network security.

Also, litecoin is certainly not at all immune to ASIC.

I don't agree that "Increased hash rate == increased network security". When ASIC bitcoin mining is widely available, if you have the same number of people mining, the network won't be more secure just because the hashrate is higher. It's all about how much $ it takes for an attacker to come up with enough hashrate to 51% the network. ASICs might eventually increase the network hashrate 50x but that does not mean the network is 50x more secure if it costs the same amount of money for someone to successfully attack the network.

Take for example, if someone found a way to optimize the miner software to be 10x better hashrate and it works on CPUs, GPUs, FPGAs, and ASICs. Then all of the sudden, the next day EVERYONE uses the new miner software and the network hashrate jumps from 50 thahs/s to 500 thash/s. Is the network now ten times more secure?

If that strawman is the best example you can come up with to play devil's advocate, then no. But do you really think that a network composed of <1% of the global GPUs is invulnerable to a virus attack? Bitcoin was nearly attacked this way, but the perps instead decided to profit. Maybe LTC will not be so lucky.

Where did I say Litecoin is invulnerable to attacks? If huge botnet that uses CPU and GPU can successfully attack Litecoin. But botnet operators likely just want to make money, so as like Bitcoin, they will just add to the hashrate and help secure Litecoin.

That may be true. All I'm saying is that getting a lot of CPUs and GPUs together to attack LTCs 4.7 GH/s is going to be easier than going up against BTCs 54 TH/s

[coblee]

Increased hash rate == increased network security.

Also, litecoin is certainly not at all immune to ASIC.

I don't agree that "Increased hash rate == increased network security". When ASIC bitcoin mining is widely available, if you have the same number of people mining, the network won't be more secure just because the hashrate is higher. It's all about how much $ it takes for an attacker to come up with enough hashrate to 51% the network. ASICs might eventually increase the network hashrate 50x but that does not mean the network is 50x more secure if it costs the same amount of money for someone to successfully attack the network.

Take for example, if someone found a way to optimize the miner software to be 10x better hashrate and it works on CPUs, GPUs, FPGAs, and ASICs. Then all of the sudden, the next day EVERYONE uses the new miner software and the network hashrate jumps from 50 thahs/s to 500 thash/s. Is the network now ten times more secure?

If that strawman is the best example you can come up with to play devil's advocate, then no. But do you really think that a network composed of <1% of the global GPUs is invulnerable to a virus attack? Bitcoin was nearly attacked this way, but the perps instead decided to profit. Maybe LTC will not be so lucky.

Where did I say Litecoin is invulnerable to attacks? If huge botnet that uses CPU and GPU can successfully attack Litecoin. But botnet operators likely just want to make money, so as like Bitcoin, they will just add to the hashrate and help secure Litecoin.

That may be true. All I'm saying is that getting a lot of CPUs and GPUs together to attack LTCs 4.7 GH/s is going to be easier than going up against BTCs 54 TH/s

Don't forget that mining litecoin with GPUs is about 1000x different in speed. So 4.7 ghash/s network hashrate of Litecoin is about equivalent to 4.7 thash/s network hashrate of Bitcoin. It's still much smaller, but not as small as the numbers make it seem like.

[cbeast]

Increased hash rate == increased network security.

Also, litecoin is certainly not at all immune to ASIC.

I don't agree that "Increased hash rate == increased network security". When ASIC bitcoin mining is widely available, if you have the same number of people mining, the network won't be more secure just because the hashrate is higher. It's all about how much $ it takes for an attacker to come up with enough hashrate to 51% the network. ASICs might eventually increase the network hashrate 50x but that does not mean the network is 50x more secure if it costs the same amount of money for someone to successfully attack the network.

Take for example, if someone found a way to optimize the miner software to be 10x better hashrate and it works on CPUs, GPUs, FPGAs, and ASICs. Then all of the sudden, the next day EVERYONE uses the new miner software and the network hashrate jumps from 50 thahs/s to 500 thash/s. Is the network now ten times more secure?

If that strawman is the best example you can come up with to play devil's advocate, then no. But do you really think that a network composed of <1% of the global GPUs is invulnerable to a virus attack? Bitcoin was nearly attacked this way, but the perps instead decided to profit. Maybe LTC will not be so lucky.

Where did I say Litecoin is invulnerable to attacks? If huge botnet that uses CPU and GPU can successfully attack Litecoin. But botnet operators likely just want to make money, so as like Bitcoin, they will just add to the hashrate and help secure Litecoin.

That may be true. All I'm saying is that getting a lot of CPUs and GPUs together to attack LTCs 4.7 GH/s is going to be easier than going up against BTCs 54 TH/s

Don't forget that mining litecoin with GPUs is about 1000x different in speed. So 4.7 ghash/s network hashrate of Litecoin is about equivalent to 4.7 thash/s network hashrate of Bitcoin. It's still much smaller, but not as small as the numbers make it seem like.

That's only because it takes advantage of the typical PC configuration. Currently, most people are already running LTC on GPUs. When prople start using cloud computing, where will your network power come from? ASICs are made specifically for Bitcoin and will evolve seperately from personal devices. LTC may one day have unique hardware, but it will then be just a BTC imitator.

[tgsrge]

That's only because it takes advantage of the typical PC configuration. Currently, most people are already running LTC on GPUs. When prople start using cloud computing, where will your network power come from? ASICs are made specifically for Bitcoin and will evolve seperately from personal devices. LTC may one day have unique hardware, but it will then be just a BTC imitator.

yes, please, go ahead and speed up scrypt by a factor of 1000

[DeathAndTaxes]

No you misunderstand and didn't read the link. If someone spends 10k on a Scrypt Asic it won't give them a 100 times performance boost over someone rigging together 10k's worth of top graphics cards.

Some performance boost will be gained but the algorithm was specifically designed so a government entity for example couldn't crack a Scrypt hashed password by simply throwing more money at the hardware because it will become exponentially more expensive. Again, read the paper it's all in there.

It may have been designed that way but then the creators crippled it by using parameters which make is ~14,000x less memory hard then the default settings.  An Litecoin ASIC is more than possible.  The value of mining will need to be much higher but that was also true of Bitcoin.  Nobody was talking BTC ASICs when the Bitcoin exchange rate was $3 either.

[flound1129]

I suspect MTGOX is accepting LTC for the same reason, not because it has any inherit advantage over BTC.

Mtgox is accepting them because they are currently missing out on a 0.6% fee of millions of litecoins that are traded daily. They are a business and they care about making money... at the moment btc-e is making tens of thousands of dollars per day from these litecoins, and they are still small.

MTGOX is the primary exchange for new investors. Adding LTC, NMC, NVC, IXC, etc., will just make BTC look cheap and reinforce the notion that we should all just wait and see which one will be the best.

Why shouldn't we do just that?

Bitcoin is not necessarily the best, just the first.

[Mike Christ]

I wouldn't dump Bitcoin or Litecoin.  But I am dumping the fiat for both

[cbeast]

I suspect MTGOX is accepting LTC for the same reason, not because it has any inherit advantage over BTC.

Mtgox is accepting them because they are currently missing out on a 0.6% fee of millions of litecoins that are traded daily. They are a business and they care about making money... at the moment btc-e is making tens of thousands of dollars per day from these litecoins, and they are still small.

MTGOX is the primary exchange for new investors. Adding LTC, NMC, NVC, IXC, etc., will just make BTC look cheap and reinforce the notion that we should all just wait and see which one will be the best.

Why shouldn't we do just that?

Bitcoin is not necessarily the best, just the first.

Absolutely. Let the market decide. Just don't be surprised when LTC2, LTC3, LTC4, etc do better than LTC.

That's only because it takes advantage of the typical PC configuration. Currently, most people are already running LTC on GPUs. When prople start using cloud computing, where will your network power come from? ASICs are made specifically for Bitcoin and will evolve seperately from personal devices. LTC may one day have unique hardware, but it will then be just a BTC imitator.

yes, please, go ahead and speed up scrypt by a factor of 1000

You missed my point. Try running scrypt in an IPAD or Chromebook. Nobody will have multithreading CPUs anymore with loads of memory.

[allthingsluxury]

I wouldn't dump Bitcoin or Litecoin.  But I am dumping the fiat for both

Hear hear!

[cbeast]

I take it all back. Go Litecoin! Viva la Bitcoin! Drive on Namecoin! There is more than enough room for all of these currencies and more to go to the moon!

[coblee]

I take it all back. Go Litecoin! Viva la Bitcoin! Drive on Namecoin! There is more than enough room for all of these currencies and more to go to the moon!

[cbeast]

I take it all back. Go Litecoin! Viva la Bitcoin! Drive on Namecoin! There is more than enough room for all of these currencies and more to go to the moon!

I think it would be a death knell for MTGOX to adopt other currencies, but it won't hurt Bitcoin a bit. In fact it would open up more serious exchanges and brokerages to the Bitcoin market.

[tgsrge]

Just because people are dumb and buying LTC it does not mean it is going to become useful.

>implying litecoin is not already useful.

this is pointless, fwiw, bitcoin was for a loooong time just a 100% speculative thing. a lot of people still view (and treat) bitcoin like that.

[flound1129]

LTC is overpriced almost worthless coin. For every item or service you can actualy buy with it there is 100x more items or services you can buy with BTC.

And for a vendor who already accepts cryptocurrency and wants access to more customers there is a negligible cost of implementing additional crytpocurrencies.

[johnyj]

Current technology shift is like when people switch from CPU to GPU, BFL play a very big role here, they are going to distribute ASIC devices to many different kind of users. If I get it right, they have some 30000 order or so, that should give enough people access to ASIC mining devices, and it's typically cheaper than GPU mining devices

[MegatonWarrior]

LTC is based on specific technology with the assumption that ASIC's will not be used.  BTC is based on Moore's Law and independent of specific technology.  LTC was created to deter GPU's but now they are the dominant technology.  Once a LTC ASIC is made, the distinction between LTC and BTC will be close to nil.

[tgsrge]

Wrong parallel. Bitcoin is still alive. You are not living in a parallel universe without Bitcoin. The mere fact Bitcoin was first cryptocoin out there gives it
complete and absolute "cleanup" from all "bad" things that happened around it. What "cleanup" you have for Litecoin? Is there even 1 thing Bitcoin could
copy / paste from Litecoin that didn't originated from Bitcoin? Scrypt? Nope, all you did is changed Bitcoin algo with another one. Is there any concept,
technology, structure, module, ideology, purpose or anything like that in Litecoin but not in Bitcoin? Nope. Copy / paste change few lines of code kids!

All this bullshits from the mouths of you who invested in LTC is about nothing more but attempting to add some value to it so you can profit. Ask anyone
who has no cryptocoins whatsoever what would be his or her choice if he or she decides to jump onto cryptocoin train. Litecoin? Gotta be complete retard
or someone who is versed with investments, and is ready to go with very high risk in order to eventualy profit a bit more than investing in bitcoins.

Not even 6 months ago I had no cryptocoins at all, but I worked for bitcoins. Now I can buy over 1 THashes of ASICs with what I earned, for those same
bitcoins. I don't have to mess with any other currency whatsoever. Once LTC comes even close to allowing such a deal, I'll start taking it seriously.

Until then, keep on dreaming and pray someone else do the job - that is most of Litecoiners are capable of, judging based on lack of LTC purchasing power.

i dont even know what the fuck you're on about now. look at the fucking charts. litecoin hit $1 for the first time a few days ago. it's now sitting at ~4.5. You can ignore, disrespect, call us all a bunch of devil-worshippers and even excommunicate those who use litecoin it's not going to make any difference. early adopters (and even not so early adopters) are quite enjoying their profits from making the right calls, and the world probably has more than a few new millionaires today. Now, if you (and some others) want to keep denying the reality that's your own fucking (boneheaded) choice.

[Mjbmonetarymetals]

As it becomes clearer that new money is finding its way to Litecoin rather than drawing from Bitcoin as in they both increase in value at the same time, then we can all site around a campfire roasting marshmellows in peace. 

[Liquid]

converted 30 BTC to LTC