Is there any sense in making so many alternate coins?

[miningnew]

I am looking here for the first time and i am supprised how many coins exist.
But why? Any sense?

[1714527067]

1714527067

[1714527067]

1714527067

[1714527067]

1714527067

[1714527067]

1714527067

[1714527067]

1714527067

[1714527067]

1714527067

[allthingsluxury]

Many will simply cease to exist. The ones that the market deems have purpose will carry on.

[qxzn]

Fun? Experiments? And maybe there is no sense, but people do lots of things that don't make sense. At least making alt-coins is harmless.

[CoinHoarder]

Its about time ALTs stop being copy cats and provide real innovation to the crypto coin ecosystem. I no longer support ALTs that are pretty much just copy cats. I suggest others do the same.

[MrWizard]

Its about time ALTs stop being copy cats and provide real innovation to the crypto coin ecosystem. I no longer support ALTs that are pretty much just copy cats. I suggest others do the same.

I totally agree.  We need innovation.  Otherwise we would still be driving Model Ts and Model As, in our choice of color black.

[temor]

There is no sense in it other than doing it for learning purposes.
Creating altcoins to learn more of the mechanics behind it is fine, and I would promote it to anyone who want better knowledge of the inner workings of cryptocurrencies, but releasing a 1:1 copy of another coin and just change the name and logo for it is the definition of pointless.

I totally agree.  We need innovation.  Otherwise we would still be driving Model Ts and Model As, in our choice of color black.

I wouldn't mind that at all, actually

[GambitBTC]

The reason their are so many is because everyone wants a get rich quick scheme.

[qxzn]

It's also a great way to steal a bunch of bitcoin/litecoin via trojan. Most people seem to run these random binaries without bothering to verify that the binaries actually come from the source, and without looking at the source to make sure there's no trojan. So when they run it on the same machine as their wallet.dat files  --- voila, free bitcoins!

[dorei]

Why not?
more altcoins = more fun 
however, I beieve that in the long run, only a few cryptocurrencies will survive.

[GambitBTC]

Feathercoins seems to have had a marginally successful launch.


Im a supporter

[crazy_rabbit]

Why not?
more altcoins = more fun 
however, I beieve that in the long run, only a few cryptocurrencies will survive.

+1 BTC, LTC, TRC, PPC, CRC. :-)

[FuzzyBear]

divide and conquer...

The more coins that are created the hashing power is divided even more.. leaving smaller chains vunerable to attack or being left stranded at high difficulties, but for the size of the mining population of the world has grown massively over the last few months hence why we have seen a bull run in the coin creation

[LaggedOnUser]

The reason their are so many is because everyone wants a get rich quick scheme.

I think a major reason is "excessive early adopter awards", a problem we discussed in a previous thread called the "Coin Complaint List" (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=183256.0).

Most of the altcoins are either premined or designed on purpose to give huge rewards to the early adopters but ever-decreasing awards after that.  Consider Bitcoin itself.  Half of the coins were mined between 2009 until today (4 years).  That leaves until 2040 (27 years) to mine the other half of the coins!

The only way with this design to be a privileged insider is to be the one starting it, or at least get in on the ground floor.  So people start currency after currency, then will probably lose interest once the rich mining rewards stop, and they'll be on to the next one.

I would recommend that some future coin incorporate a constant rate of coin creation because of this.  Each year, the coin could create the same exact amount of coins as the year before, say, 1 billion coins per year or whatever.  That would give newcomers the same opportunity to mine coins as early adopters.  This would seem to give the currency more staying power, since you wouldn't have to dump it just to get in on the ground floor of some new currency where you are the privileged few.  Also, the rate of inflation would steadily decrease over time, so I don't think it would be a problem.  Unlike national currencies, at least the inflation would be predictable (assuming that the usage of your coin is constant or growing).

[justabitoftime]

I'm not one to tell other people what to create and not create. If you have a great idea, bring it to fruition and let the free market sort it out.  Too many central planners around here for my taste.

" Diligently plotting to take over the World and leave you alone"

[markm]

I would recommend that some future coin incorporate a constant rate of coin creation because of this.  Each year, the coin could create the same exact amount of coins as the year before, say, 1 billion coins per year or whatever.  That would give newcomers the same opportunity to mine coins as early adopters.  This would seem to give the currency more staying power, since you wouldn't have to dump it just to get in on the ground floor of some new currency where you are the privileged few.  Also, the rate of inflation would steadily decrease over time, so I don't think it would be a problem.  Unlike national currencies, at least the inflation would be predictable (assuming that the usage of your coin is constant or growing).

Both DeVCoin and GRouPcoin have constant rate of coin-production, also either Tenebrix or GeistGeld, I forget which (maybe both) maybe also does.

-MarkM-

[Walter Rothbard]

I'm not one to tell other people what to create and not create. If you have a great idea, bring it to fruition and let the free market sort it out.  Too many central planners around here for my taste.

Hear, hear!

+1000 Testnet Bitcoins

[Etlase2]

Decrits, while only a proposal at this point, is intended to shake things up a bit.

[Tittiez]

Because it's fun. Because you can trade them for a quick profit. Why not? They aren't harming anything anyway.

[Joerii]

See it as a sort of evulotionary arms race. Survival of the fittest.

[LaggedOnUser]

I would recommend that some future coin incorporate a constant rate of coin creation because of this.  Each year, the coin could create the same exact amount of coins as the year before, say, 1 billion coins per year or whatever.  That would give newcomers the same opportunity to mine coins as early adopters.  This would seem to give the currency more staying power, since you wouldn't have to dump it just to get in on the ground floor of some new currency where you are the privileged few.  Also, the rate of inflation would steadily decrease over time, so I don't think it would be a problem.  Unlike national currencies, at least the inflation would be predictable (assuming that the usage of your coin is constant or growing).

Both DeVCoin and GRouPcoin have constant rate of coin-production, also either Tenebrix or GeistGeld, I forget which (maybe both) maybe also does.

-MarkM-

Ok, but:
* DevCoin goes 90% to developers
* GroupCoin is another charity coin where 50% goes to developers
* Tenebrix was heavily premined and seems abandoned
* GeistGold was just an experiment and seems to have been abandoned

I suppose if constant coin creation is an attractive quality in a coin, it remains to be proved.  I think it should have other attractive qualities, such as greater CPU efficiency or something, to differentiate itself, not just the fairness aspect.

However, I think it is useful to develop the theory of such coins in order to lay the groundwork for other, more successful coins of the future.

[seleme]

I am looking here for the first time and i am supprised how many coins exist.
But why? Any sense?

There is. Developers and early miners bank on them. They've seen ppc and trc getting some value and thought - "well, why wouldn't I collect some cash doing the same".

[BrewCrewFan]

I think many of you are missing the point here.

I will be very blunt too..... BUT:
Being new to this mining thing I can tell you that from a noob standpoint, if there was not alt coins which are easier to mine, I would have left and never looked back. Why? because the return on mining a bitcoin is next to impossible in itself unless you got gobs of money to invest in mining machines, which a good majority of people dont. What is needed is something that can be done part time and actually show something in return,

Now I am not saying that making a buck or 2 is a bad thing. I think many would go into it to make a few bucks. I dont do it to get rich. I do however want to make a little bit.

Alt coins give others a chance. If you want a grow community, you need them. In order to get more retailers to take coins as payment you need interest in coins too. Without interest no one takes em, and eventually coins will die.

[BrewCrewFan]

I am looking here for the first time and i am supprised how many coins exist.
But why? Any sense?

There is. Developers and early miners bank on them. They've seen ppc and trc getting some value and thought - "well, why wouldn't I collect some cash doing the same".

While this may be true, there has to be a bit of a return on creating something. Why else would you do it then?

[seleme]

I am looking here for the first time and i am supprised how many coins exist.
But why? Any sense?

There is. Developers and early miners bank on them. They've seen ppc and trc getting some value and thought - "well, why wouldn't I collect some cash doing the same".

While this may be true, there has to be a bit of a return on creating something. Why else would you do it then?

There's no point in doing it at all - that's my point. There's absolutely no value or purpose in new altcoins made each week. Cryptocurrency is supposed to be a currency and even bitcoin is not that yet and yet people are making new altcoins on weekly basis just for pump and dump purposes.

As far as I'm concerned anyone who make new altcoin without any innovative technology is utter twat. He won't care about my opinion of course as long as he make money from doing that but that's how I see it.

[BrewCrewFan]

I am looking here for the first time and i am supprised how many coins exist.
But why? Any sense?

There is. Developers and early miners bank on them. They've seen ppc and trc getting some value and thought - "well, why wouldn't I collect some cash doing the same".

While this may be true, there has to be a bit of a return on creating something. Why else would you do it then?

There's no point in doing it at all - that's my point. There's absolutely no value or purpose in new altcoins made each week. Cryptocurrency is supposed to be a currency and even bitcoin is not that yet and yet people are making new altcoins on weekly basis just for pump and dump purposes.

As far as I'm concerned anyone who make new altcoin without any innovative technology is utter twat. He won't care about my opinion of course as long as he make money from doing that but that's how I see it.

Everything in life is that way, knockoffs for shoes...you name it. The main thing should be focusing on attracting new people to something like this. You not gonna get that when your noob and you go to mine BTC, only to get .00000000454 coins a day.

If and when there is enough interest, you never know, that might get that next person or group the motivation to create "next big thing". Look at computers as an example.

[seleme]

Meh, both me and you know what is real intention about starting new altcoin and supporting it in it's realistically absolutely worthless phase (though unfortunately it's not, people are gambling and giving these rubbish new coins a value) so there's no point to hit each other with wise phrases and ideas. It's about making fast buck and that's it.

[alyssa85]

One reason is safety. Say some government decided Bitcoins threatened them - they pass legislation (which takes months to go through the legislature) saying that it is illegal to accept Bitcoins. While this is going on, the community simply changes it's bitcoins into litecoins and continues as before. After all the legislation so painstakingly crafted doesn't mention litecoins at all. And so on.

They can't ban them all.

[seleme]

One reason is safety. Say some government decided Bitcoins threatened them - they pass legislation (which takes months to go through the legislature) saying that it is illegal to accept Bitcoins. While this is going on, the community simply changes it's bitcoins into litecoins and continues as before. After all the legislation so painstakingly crafted doesn't mention litecoins at all. And so on.

They can't ban them all.

Yeah, that's noble stand is first thing that went through mind of new altcoins developers, lol.

And I hope you don't really think that government would name bitcoin and not virtual currency, cryptocurrency or whatever in such law. Come on, I'm sure you can do it better..

[LaggedOnUser]

I am looking here for the first time and i am supprised how many coins exist.
But why? Any sense?

There is. Developers and early miners bank on them. They've seen ppc and trc getting some value and thought - "well, why wouldn't I collect some cash doing the same".

While this may be true, there has to be a bit of a return on creating something. Why else would you do it then?

There's no point in doing it at all - that's my point. There's absolutely no value or purpose in new altcoins made each week. Cryptocurrency is supposed to be a currency and even bitcoin is not that yet and yet people are making new altcoins on weekly basis just for pump and dump purposes.

As far as I'm concerned anyone who make new altcoin without any innovative technology is utter twat. He won't care about my opinion of course as long as he make money from doing that but that's how I see it.

Ok, they won't make that much money, and other people can jump in and make a few dollars with them if they like.

Besides, every new altcoin, even if it just takes the parameters of the old and tweaks them, is an experiment.  Is it efficient?  Is it safe?  Does it work?  At least one has already shown that a 51% attack works in practice.  Every new business doesn't need to be based on a new technology.  Look at the dot com bubble of Internet companies, or all the me-too car companies that popped up in the 1920s.  Eventually the marketplace was shaken out and only a few winners were left standing.  And it wasn't always due to superior technology, sometimes it was due to better business practices, or better management, or better marketing, etc.  So any of these coins has a chance to succeed.

Bitcoin has the best chance though because it was first.  I agree that to displace Bitcoin, it probably would take a new technology at this point.  On the other hand, Microsoft didn't invent the operating system and Google didn't invent the search engine.  They are still #1 because they took over the market...

[BitHits]

What we really need is a NoTX Fee Coin!

[birdbrainz]

I am looking here for the first time and i am supprised how many coins exist.
But why? Any sense?

The fun factor... ?

Also = the  "what if" factor

[markm]

* DevCoin goes 90% to developers
* GroupCoin is another charity coin where 50% goes to developers
* Tenebrix was heavily premined and seems abandoned
* GeistGold was just an experiment and seems to have been abandoned

I suppose if constant coin creation is an attractive quality in a coin, it remains to be proved.  I think it should have other attractive qualities, such as greater CPU efficiency or something, to differentiate itself, not just the fairness aspect.

However, I think it is useful to develop the theory of such coins in order to lay the groundwork for other, more successful coins of the future.

Be clear that DeVCoin goes to artists, designers, developers, musicians, authors, engineers and so on of free open source things; simply saying "developers" might lead people to think that means the developers of the coin itself, rather than to people working on free open source projects in general.

GRouPcoin is not a charity coin at all, it is plain old 50 coins per block, 100% for the miner who mines the block, forever.

Tenebrix apparently will address the pre-mined arguments when it officially re-launches, possibly even by simply destroying any coins that were pre-mined.

GeistGeld, like BBQcoin but for a much longer span of time, has been a haven for CPU miners for a long long time. It is unlikely to go away any more than BBQcoin did.

-MarkM-

[LaggedOnUser]

* DevCoin goes 90% to developers
* GroupCoin is another charity coin where 50% goes to developers
* Tenebrix was heavily premined and seems abandoned
* GeistGold was just an experiment and seems to have been abandoned

I suppose if constant coin creation is an attractive quality in a coin, it remains to be proved.  I think it should have other attractive qualities, such as greater CPU efficiency or something, to differentiate itself, not just the fairness aspect.

However, I think it is useful to develop the theory of such coins in order to lay the groundwork for other, more successful coins of the future.

Be clear that DeVCoin goes to artists, designers, developers, musicians, authors, engineers and so on of free open source things; simply saying "developers" might lead to people think that means the developers of the coin itself, rather than to people working on free open source projects in general.

GRouPcoin is not a charity coin at all, it is plain old 50 coins per block, 100% for the miner who mies the block, forever.

Tenebrix apparently will address the pre-mined arguments when it officially re-launches, possibly even by simply destroying any coins that were pre-mined.

GeistGeld, like BBQcoin but for a much longer span of time, has been a haven for CPU miners for a long long time. It is unlikely to go away any more than BBQcoin did.

-MarkM-

Thank you for the clarification.  I see now (from some of your previous posts, actually) that GroupCoin was the predecessor to DevCoin, and it originally started with the 50% policy but then later dropped it.  I look forward with some interest to the relaunch of Tenebrix.