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?

[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.