Litecoin changed much more of the Bitcoin code than Feathercoin changed of the Litecoin code. To compare the changes of FC's code to the changes of LTC's code is crazy. FC was developed with much less effort and less innovation than Litecoin.
Not really. Litecoin changed 3 major things -> Block time, Number of Coins, Hashing algorithm. Feathercoin changed 2 -> Block time, Number of Coins. Changing the hash isn't really that hard from a code perspective. The large ideal's, what I'd call major changes, such as cryptographic proof of work, use of the block chain, etc etc is identical with all 3.
The benefit to scrypt is just as you said... it's different. If somewhere down the road a devastating error is found in the SHA-256 algorithm, then it is useful to have another peer to peer anonymous decentralized currency that is built on a different hashing algorithm. The existence and growth of Litecoin is beneficial to seeing that the ideals that Bitcoin was founded upon will be around for a long time (and perhaps even longer than Bitcoin itself).
Realistically if the cryptographic principles behind Bitcoin and SHA2 were compromised, I guarantee you that one of two things will happen. Either they will catch it in time and upgrade to a different algorithm for BTC, or cryptocurrencies will be dead. I can't imagine any scenario where it goes "Woops, SHA2 has been compromised, thank god we have litecoin".
Again, Litecoin is not "simply just a copy cat of Bitcoin." Yes, it shares a lot of the same code, but that is because it is based off of Bitcoin. Major parameters were changed, the hashing algorithm changed, and block speed changed. Also- it was one of the first coins to do this, now as time goes on many other coins are trying to do the same thing adding no real value to the ecosystem. Litecoin had a much fairer release than almost every single other ALT currency as well, giving a few days notice before any mining took place.
You quote things such as "the block speed changed" as a major parameter, yet call it insignificant in terms of feathercoin changing it. You say LTC is an innovator because it was the first to change some parameters. I'm saying it's not an innovator because it
only changed parameters. Also fair is a pretty strange notion to think about. Can you really say a currency which is meant to theoretically last for generations is more "fair" because it was announced on an obscure forum for a matter of days before launching? It's no more fair than any early vs late adopter coin on there. Someone getting into LTC today is worse off than someone who was there at launch, exactly as BTC was in the past vs now.
I agree LTC makes it harder to incorporate crypto currencies into ecommerce because implementing 2 coins is harder than implementing one. But, I see it as that Litecoin is here to stay, it was/is and always will be the most popular ALT currency. Therefore, it should be embraced for the good things it can do and provide for the community. Any further dilution of the crypto currencies from this point on should only be because the new coin is actually an improvement on existing coins and/or really different.
You're judging success with hindsight and adoption rather than the features it brings. LTC is useful because it's popular can sum up the argument in that paragraph. By the same logic if FTC is adopted widely and used wildly it's useful, if it dies out it's not - see how that can't work? You should be able to judge the usefulness of something independent of it's success.
I think alt currencies are a wonderful thing, but I wish they would ALL innovate more (inc LTC). I don't think we've seen an actual innovative alt coin yet. I also agree completely that many coins are simply a get rich quick scheme / ponzi scheme designed to launch, pump as much as possible making a profit before their eventual decline. It's a glorified speculation mechanism rather than trying to really be an alternative. I'm just disagreeing with your classification of FTC as one but excluding LTC on the basis that it changed one more parameter.
