Say bye to ripple, prepare to say bye to litecoin

[oakpacific]

Litecoin has value over and above bitcoin because transfers are faster. In fact, there isn't really a reason for bitcoin to exist (sacrilege I know) once litecoin becomes mainstream, because it's the same but slower.

Feathercoin, CHNCoin etc offer no benefit over litecoin, however...

Translation: "I have more Litecoins than Bitcoins."
LOL 

Indeed. If Litecoin is to prevail over Bitcoin because of its 2.5m block time then Litecoin will itself be toast because Feathercoin and Chinacoin are both much faster than that. One or both of those would prevail instead.

The reason Litecoin survives is scrypt. But it also opens it up to possibility of botnet attack, at least for now.

[RationalSpeculator]

I have to admit though that the market disagrees with me. Litecoin is being valued by the market. It's valued around 1/20th of bitcoin. All things being equal this will probably continue in the future.

I don't see the practical use yet though. Maybe Litecoin will be needed for smaller transactions? (if bitcoin indeed allows smaller transactions less and less over time)

[ElectricMucus]

I have to admit though that the market disagrees with me. Litecoin is being valued by the market. It's valued around 1/20th of bitcoin. All things being equal this will probably continue in the future.

I don't see the practical use yet though. Maybe Litecoin will be needed for smaller transactions? (if bitcoin indeed allows smaller transactions less and less over time)

It probably will stay efficient to run on retail hardware for a long time, transaction confirmation time isn't really relevant unless it is magnitudes shorter.

[etbbtc]

wait for mtgox

[solex]

I have to admit though that the market disagrees with me. Litecoin is being valued by the market. It's valued around 1/20th of bitcoin. All things being equal this will probably continue in the future.

I don't see the practical use yet though. Maybe Litecoin will be needed for smaller transactions? (if bitcoin indeed allows smaller transactions less and less over time)

I think I get how the market values Litecoin.

BTC fx rate / block frequency ratio / transactions per day ratio

So,  approximately: LTC fx rate = $110 / (10 / 2.5) / (60,000 / 8,000) = $3.67

The block frequency ratio covers the inflation aspect, and the transaction ratio covers the measure of utility. Ideally, block reward transactions should be excluded from the transaction ratio.

But I am surprised. Where are most of the thousands of LTC transactions per day coming from?
http://ltc.block-explorer.com/charts

[adpinbr]

I think that Ripple is here to stay and it has a bright future. Though probably XRP is a bit overpriced currently, but they don't claim it to be a store of value anyway, they say it is just the means to prevent transaction spam, so its price doesn't really mean anything (I expect it to fluctuate a lot due to giveaways, media attention, technical problems, etc).

XRP is as "overpriced" as BTC was in early 2011 when it went to almost dollar parity.

Personally I didn't invest in ripple and i heard about it right when it came out (sorry about that today) cause i didn't believe in it. I see it as a Hawala network gone digital.It doesn't grant the financial freedom bit coin does (i.e. protection from inflation, ease of movement without 3rd parties/payment system, decentralized) to me it looks like any other P2P payment system that already exists, except they claim anyone can become a gateway, they claim it will be open source, and they put it in pretty packaging right when bit coin proved itself, and somehow people confused ripple for a crypto-currency and not a payment processor.

But if we look at the "scoreboard" I'm out of my mind cause it was a big mistake not to invest, so I'm gonna eat my hat like my dad did after bit coin made it and ask you why did you invest in ripple? why do you think its gonna work out? do you believe in the philosophy behind it? do you think its still gonna go up?

[scotjam]

Litecoin has value over and above bitcoin because transfers are faster. In fact, there isn't really a reason for bitcoin to exist (sacrilege I know) once litecoin becomes mainstream, because it's the same but slower.

Feathercoin, CHNCoin etc offer no benefit over litecoin, however...

Translation: "I have more Litecoins than Bitcoins."
LOL 

True indeed - but that's *because* of the argument above (rather than the other way around). I also have a bunch of feathercoins (more than litecoins), but don't really see what value they add over litecoins

[scotjam]

Indeed. If Litecoin is to prevail over Bitcoin because of its 2.5m block time then Litecoin will itself be toast because Feathercoin and Chinacoin are both much faster than that. One or both of those would prevail instead.

My understanding was that feathercoin is not inherently any faster than litecoin. In fact bushstar (the feathercoin creator?) said so himself:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=178286.680

I'm pretty sure Chinacoin is just another litecoin knock-off.

[scotjam]

Thanks for your argumentation

What about the network effect? Meaning the value of the network goes up with the amount of participants?

Litecoin has faster transactions and if this alone is sufficiently important to a sufficiently large number of people then indeed it will succeed. But all those people look also at where can I use it? And then Litecoin is far inferior to bitcoin, even with faster transactions. So my argument is, for an altcoin to get those sufficient amount of people, it needs to offer many more advantages over the competitor. Comparable to facebook, windows, or ebay, the more amount of users, the more valuable it becomes and even with serious disadvantages over a new product/service, people will still chose for that due to the network effect.

One important advantage may build a niche market, but does not stand a chance to take over the far larger network. Many important advantages however do stand a chance to take over a much larger network.   

I don't hold any altcoins because of reasons mentioned. However, I was also resistent to bitcoin and it took time for me to see the truth in the argumentations. I might miss something in the altcoins too, hence this discussion.

My view is that it is not the *number* of advantages that something offers, but the *value* of the advantage(s) that it offers. That is why I was somewhat dismissive of the "7 advantages" theory.

Network effect is absolutely critical to adoption. It is probably the most important advantage, *most* of the time. However there are exceptions, and empires with massive network effects have fallen in the past. Myspace (or Bebo or Friendster) had a much stronger network effect than facebook (when it first started) in terms of sheer numbers, but facebook was "cooler", dominated by students, and had a great user interface (very clean).

Speed of transactions is very important to the payments industry. 6 confirmations from the bitcoin network is too slow for many applications. It works fine for remittance and ecommerce, but doesn't really work at all for face-to-face retail. Do you want to stand around waiting for 10 minutes for your cup of coffee to be authorised?

Litecoin is probably still too slow for many of the applications that near-realtime transactions would open up. But it's faster than Bitcoin. And it has a decent level of network effect - there are plenty of exchanges between litecoin and bitcoin etc., and plenty of miners, so in my opinion it has a decent shot at hanging around for quite a while (if not overtaking Bitcoin).

[cdog]

The problem with Ripple is that OpenCoin could be raided by the feds and then XRP are worth NOTHING.

Also, it isnt mined - and it isnt even close to being scarce. Its made by a FOR_PROFIT_PRIVATE_COMPANY. They have one goal. MAKE MONEY.

BTC and LTC dont have these problems...

[RationalSpeculator]

Thanks for your argumentation

What about the network effect? Meaning the value of the network goes up with the amount of participants?

Litecoin has faster transactions and if this alone is sufficiently important to a sufficiently large number of people then indeed it will succeed. But all those people look also at where can I use it? And then Litecoin is far inferior to bitcoin, even with faster transactions. So my argument is, for an altcoin to get those sufficient amount of people, it needs to offer many more advantages over the competitor. Comparable to facebook, windows, or ebay, the more amount of users, the more valuable it becomes and even with serious disadvantages over a new product/service, people will still chose for that due to the network effect.

One important advantage may build a niche market, but does not stand a chance to take over the far larger network. Many important advantages however do stand a chance to take over a much larger network.  

I don't hold any altcoins because of reasons mentioned. However, I was also resistent to bitcoin and it took time for me to see the truth in the argumentations. I might miss something in the altcoins too, hence this discussion.

My view is that it is not the *number* of advantages that something offers, but the *value* of the advantage(s) that it offers. That is why I was somewhat dismissive of the "7 advantages" theory.

Network effect is absolutely critical to adoption. It is probably the most important advantage, *most* of the time. However there are exceptions, and empires with massive network effects have fallen in the past. Myspace (or Bebo or Friendster) had a much stronger network effect than facebook (when it first started) in terms of sheer numbers, but facebook was "cooler", dominated by students, and had a great user interface (very clean).

Speed of transactions is very important to the payments industry. 6 confirmations from the bitcoin network is too slow for many applications. It works fine for remittance and ecommerce, but doesn't really work at all for face-to-face retail. Do you want to stand around waiting for 10 minutes for your cup of coffee to be authorised?

Litecoin is probably still too slow for many of the applications that near-realtime transactions would open up. But it's faster than Bitcoin. And it has a decent level of network effect - there are plenty of exchanges between litecoin and bitcoin etc., and plenty of miners, so in my opinion it has a decent shot at hanging around for quite a while (if not overtaking Bitcoin).

True, myspace was beaten by facebook. Network effects aren't everything and can work in reverse too! But as you say correctly facebook was better. Better interface, cooler clientele, but also better tools and apps, more options, and far superior marketing (everyone that signed up and 'searched friends' via their email account would send automatically a personalized email invitation to all those people to join facebook too). The setup was also very different, myspace was public personalized webpages, whereas facebook was a private network.  

Litecoin does not offer such great improvements over bitcoin. You are hammering on a single advantage in favor of Litecoin 'faster transactions'. By your own admission you say that the value of this is limited as it's also not fast enough for realtime transactions. I've read also many counterarguments that Bitcoin does not allow realtime transactions. Satoshi Dice offers realtime transactions with bitcoin. And for smaller transactions with merchants in the street the risk of not waiting for a single confirmation is acceptable.

I'm sorry but I think, just like facebook did, Litecoin will have to offer much more value/advantages in order for it to even be able to build a niche market, let alone take over bitcoin.

Litecoin today lives at the mercy of speculators. And I think speculators that bid up Litecoin and believe in it long term, will pay dearly for letting hope/greed instead of rational evaluation guide their decisions. I would advise strongly to also listen to your sceptical/fear part, now that you still can lock in most of the value.

I might be totally wrong and will continue to follow this thread in search for better arguments in favor of Litecoin.

[ElectricMucus]

I think that Ripple is here to stay and it has a bright future. Though probably XRP is a bit overpriced currently, but they don't claim it to be a store of value anyway, they say it is just the means to prevent transaction spam, so its price doesn't really mean anything (I expect it to fluctuate a lot due to giveaways, media attention, technical problems, etc).

XRP is as "overpriced" as BTC was in early 2011 when it went to almost dollar parity.

Personally I didn't invest in ripple and i heard about it right when it came out (sorry about that today) cause i didn't believe in it. I see it as a Hawala network gone digital.It doesn't grant the financial freedom bit coin does (i.e. protection from inflation, ease of movement without 3rd parties/payment system, decentralized) to me it looks like any other P2P payment system that already exists, except they claim anyone can become a gateway, they claim it will be open source, and they put it in pretty packaging right when bit coin proved itself, and somehow people confused ripple for a crypto-currency and not a payment processor.

But if we look at the "scoreboard" I'm out of my mind cause it was a big mistake not to invest, so I'm gonna eat my hat like my dad did after bit coin made it and ask you why did you invest in ripple? why do you think its gonna work out? do you believe in the philosophy behind it? do you think its still gonna go up?

I didn't invest in it, I just didn't sell my free XRP and I won't sell them at least till ripple comes out of beta. I think that once ripple is up and running XRP will be the first bitcoin alternative to exceed it in market capitalization.  (It already does if you account for the XRP still hold by opencoin)
If prices go below 1BTC/100k I will probably buy a bunch though.

[tclo]

Ripple has some major venture capital millions of dollars backing it.  Don't sell it short...well maybe the current price is unsustainable but then again it could run up higher. I like it though.

[dancupid]

Ripple has some major venture capital millions of dollars backing it.  Don't sell it short...well maybe the current price is unsustainable but then again it could run up higher. I like it though.

Buying xrp is not the same as buying shares in Ripple - they already have their own business arrangements involving real money with their backers.
You think the venture capitalists exchanged their millions of dollars for xrp?

The value of xrp has nothing to do with the value of Ripple as a payment system.
xrp could be worth 1c per 100000xrp and Ripple would still work as a payment system.

They are almost certainly going to release massive amounts of xrp to reduce the price of xrp to make entry into the ripple system as cheap as possible.
No one will use Ripple if xrp becomes hard to obtain. They will throw xrp around like confetti.

[ElectricMucus]

Ripple has some major venture capital millions of dollars backing it.  Don't sell it short...well maybe the current price is unsustainable but then again it could run up higher. I like it though.

Buying xrp is not the same as buying shares in Ripple - they already have their own business arrangements involving real money with their backers.
You think the venture capitalists exchanged their millions of dollars for xrp?

The value of xrp has nothing to do with the value of Ripple as a payment system.
xrp could be worth 1c per 100000xrp and Ripple would still work as a payment system.

They are almost certainly going to release massive amounts of xrp to reduce the price of xrp to make entry into the ripple system as cheap as possible.
No one will use Ripple if xrp becomes hard to obtain. They will throw xrp around like confetti.

It's their financing model though so don't expect they won't charge for the rain of confetti. Plus the way to lower the barrier of entry already has been established: Lowering the XRP fees instead of flooding the market with additional ones.

[misterbigg]

Buying xrp is not the same as buying shares in Ripple - they already have their own business arrangements involving real money with their backers.
You think the venture capitalists exchanged their millions of dollars for xrp?

I wouldn't be so sure about that. How else is OpenCoin going to make money besides holding XRPs and hoping they go up in value? Once the server code is open sourced, they will have no control over the network.

[dancupid]

Ripple has some major venture capital millions of dollars backing it.  Don't sell it short...well maybe the current price is unsustainable but then again it could run up higher. I like it though.

Buying xrp is not the same as buying shares in Ripple - they already have their own business arrangements involving real money with their backers.
You think the venture capitalists exchanged their millions of dollars for xrp?

The value of xrp has nothing to do with the value of Ripple as a payment system.
xrp could be worth 1c per 100000xrp and Ripple would still work as a payment system.

They are almost certainly going to release massive amounts of xrp to reduce the price of xrp to make entry into the ripple system as cheap as possible.
No one will use Ripple if xrp becomes hard to obtain. They will throw xrp around like confetti.

It's their financing model though so don't expect they won't charge for the rain of confetti. Plus the way to lower the barrier of entry already has been established: Lowering the XRP fees instead of flooding the market with additional ones.

But you can't use ripple unless you have xrp - they have to give it away. You can't buy ripples unless you have ripples already.
No average Joe will use ripple if Ripple don't give them free xrp.

[ElectricMucus]

But you can't use ripple unless you have xrp - they have to give it away. You can't buy ripples unless you have ripples already.
No average Joe will use ripple if Ripple don't give them free xrp.

Yes and no, yes they will give away quite a bunch, but at which rate?
I agree that current market prices are influenced by the sub sequential reduction of the rate they are given away on the forum. And once there is another giveaway prices might drop.

Now the assumption that the average joe won't use ripple unless it's gratis is flawed.
Think of this of how Second Life works: Linden Dollars are both traded on the market and supplied by Linden labs, the most straight-forward way to do this is for opencoin to sell XRP via credit card.
There would also be third party sites which sell them at a semi-fixed rate just like coinlab does.

[Vycid]

My opinion on Ripple is that it's not needed. When you lend bitcoins or fiat, you are also creating debt out of thin air, and when the debt is repaid, it vanishes. Sure a system that allows you to lend/borrow bitcoins based on reputation might have it's use but such system does not need it's own kind of currency like ripple. The market value of ripples is crashing and for good reason I believe. Litecoin shares the same faith in my opinion. I remember a book I read at the time from Sony or Philips and there the mantra is, a new technology needs to have at least 7 big innovations for it to have a chance to succeed. Bitcoin has that over fiat and gold, Litecoin does not have that over bitcoin. Litecoin is a copycat with very few innovations over bitcoin. In a network environment where the value comes from the amount of participants, copycats do not have a chance.

From an investor's perspective the altcoins are like low end real estate. In a real estate boom it goes up even more than quality real estate, but it loses much more value when the inevitable crash comes. And chances are that it will never recover but will be bulldozered down, as no one needs it anymore. Whereas the quality real estate, although highly undervalued, will continue to stand as there continues to be a need for it. I might be totally wrong so counterarguments are very welcome.


Ps: Also note that the analogy made for litecoin that it is silver versus bitcoin gold is not valid. When gold was money, there was not enough of it, so silver was also used as money. There are enough bitcoins to serve the whole world.

You're rejecting the gold to silver analogy and substituting a real estate analogy?

How about this: No analogies apply at all, because cryptocurrency is unlike anything that has ever existed before?

[Simran]

Your name speaks for the type of judgment you made. Threads like these have been made since the start if altcoins, and guess what? They're still here. The Litecoin part reminds of all the threads that were going on in December 2011 and nearly all of 2012.