When will the madness end?

[Coinbrah]

Like, aren't we getting a little exhausted from chasing two coins per day? Is anyone else evening mining these things anymore?

Discuss.

[nearmiss]

it ends when people stop buying them. So far that hasn't really happened, especially with cryptsy now out there.

[swordfish6975]

It ends when people don't care anymore....

I predict a week from this post

[Coinbrah]

I really can't even tell which coin is the newest anymore.

[RyNinDaCleM]

Back in '11, we saw the same thing though not nearly on the scale as we are now. It will pass, and every released coin just dilutes the "get rich quick" mentality that drives these new coins.

[bitcoiners]

@op.

It won't.  As long as people can make money on releasing a new coin every single day, nothing will change.  Too many idiots going around.

[cebb]

@op.

It won't.  As long as people can make money on releasing a new coin every single day, nothing will change.  Too many idiots going around.

But people can't make money if coins are announced at this rate.

From a small miner's perspective (1 MH/S) :

5 weeks: FTC was very profitable
4 Weeks: CNC was profitable
3 weeks: YAC was mildly profitable
1 week: Digicoin was barely profitable
1 Day: Fastcoin = Not sure if the latest announced fastcoin will be even worth the electricity i am spending!!


I am saying NO to any more alt coins mining unless there are some serious innovations in the coin.

[Peter Lambert]

it ends when people stop buying them. So far that hasn't really happened, especially with cryptsy now out there.

You mean people are actually buying these crap coins? I guess there are people willing to gamble on anything.

[thisnewcoin]

lol, you think CNC, YAC, FTC, DGC etc are not junks? they are exactly the same as others we see today created, be it the AMC, USC, FST, etc etc, they are exactly the same!

As long as people want these junks, I don't see an end, and I don't see why we want to blame these dev at all.

[mika1977]

I say no too, enough with all BS every day, going to mine only and only btc.

[KrLos]

i was thinking the same, i stopped at YAC, i'm done now with these alts

[baconcooledcomputer]

i was thinking the same, i stopped at YAC, i'm done now with these alts

Same. Looks like YAC was also pumped and dumped pretty hard, even being a CPU-only coin.

[fendlestick]

I went back to the BTCe coins after my DGC dump order filled.  To much risk of wasted mining time.

[hammz]

news is all penny stocks will soon be banned from the stock market, because it was just too annoying for some people...quote: screw them, and their business,  says the uber supreme overlords of all that can exist in the universe, if we don't totally likes it, and shiz,  it shall not pass... /quote  

[CanadianGuy]

its less productive than a bottle cap collection

[qwerty1231121]

There are no coin that's truely innovative. Wonder who's actually buying the junk coins. Especially the ones who buys so early at such a high price.

[Artyom]

CNC, YAC, FTC, DGC

The names of all these junk coins remind me names of graffiti crews.

[whitedragon]

I've said a few times that chasing these new coins or whichever coin is "King of the Day" on coinchoose is a waste of time.  My primary interest in crypto is mining (though I'm not a big time miner)...but I have stopped checking for new coin releases and even stopped checking coinchoose.  The last new coin launch I bothered to mine was Nibble, because I thought it was a fair launch and the coin has more potential than most of the others.  Other than some part time Nibble mining I stick to Novacoin (difficulty isn't astronomical and stable price) or Litecoin.

[fendlestick]

Gotta agree NVC is looking good to mine.

[joele]

The good thing here is it divide the hashing power of all miners.

[worldinacoin]

The easiest way, dun chase any of the alt coins if you are too busy.  For me I go for one or two once in a while for interest and fun.

[erk]

Most people have common sense and won't launch a me too coin in to an already saturated market, but all it takes is one idiot in say a thousand to get several new coins per day. I see no end until people make a conscious effort to ignore new coins. When we actually need a important new feature, then we discuss it for several weeks and decide if it needs a new coin or just altering an existing one.

[laris2]

The insanity will never end  ))))

[namzycad3]

demand and supply

btw other than BTC LTC NMC. ( or may be DGC due to fast confirmation but might have security issue ) all other coin is there for people to manipulate/P&D 

[Impaler]

Most people have common sense and won't launch a me too coin in to an already saturated market, but all it takes is one idiot in say a thousand to get several new coins per day. I see no end until people make a conscious effort to ignore new coins. When we actually need a important new feature, then we discuss it for several weeks and decide if it needs a new coin or just altering an existing one.

This is an important point, most new features can be added to existing coins.  And people with new ideas or new code should be shopping them around around to the developers of existing coins, running some test net and generally look to minimize the number of coin-chains, anyone who is seeking to maximize the number of chains is in my opinion at best being irresponsible.  Only after an idea is rejected by existing coins, vetted as reliable and desired by the community is it appropriate to start a new chain.

[digitalindustry]

I've said a few times that chasing these new coins or whichever coin is "King of the Day" on coinchoose is a waste of time.  My primary interest in crypto is mining (though I'm not a big time miner)...but I have stopped checking for new coin releases and even stopped checking coinchoose.  The last new coin launch I bothered to mine was Nibble, because I thought it was a fair launch and the coin has more potential than most of the others.  Other than some part time Nibble mining I stick to Novacoin (difficulty isn't astronomical and stable price) or Litecoin.

good plan mate - point is you can get plenty of nibble now , then move back to NVC for your stable return, but I’d mine nibble now , it may not be this diff ever again.

then again it may be , and the price is great, i hope it stay right here for a while longer, i want the most people with the lowest # to be able to get this currency while it is not the target of any large operations.

That’s the point, this is the free market at work.

no fancy IPO needed no "Syndicate" no control vector , no us deciding who gets what, simple and clear.

what is helping us is all this noise, we love all the "coin" floating around. keep releasing we say !

the more the better ! - the longer time our currency stays down here the more distributed it will be - we want everyone to have some nibble love !

[sor.rge]

This is an important point, most new features can be added to existing coins.  And people with new ideas or new code should be shopping them around around to the developers of existing coins, running some test net and generally look to minimize the number of coin-chains, anyone who is seeking to maximize the number of chains is in my opinion at best being irresponsible.  Only after an idea is rejected by existing coins, vetted as reliable and desired by the community is it appropriate to start a new chain.

I don't see how most new features can be added to existing coins. Say I want to test ultra-short blocks, an idea that is very popular now, mainly because it's trivial to implement in the current code. How exactly do you propose it to be integrated in bitcoin, for example?
Why should I be bothered with the developers of existing coins? I don't even know who they are. Even if an idea is compatible with some coin's current implementation (can you give an example of this?), how is it possible to persuade its developers to work on it? How a rejected idea can be vetted as reliable?
Also the community in this forum is extremely biased, because the majority are miners. They are not an indication of a coin's success, unless the coin is released specifically for forum members. Which seems to be the case for all recent coins, but a serious developer should not be influenced by this.

[erk]

This is an important point, most new features can be added to existing coins.  And people with new ideas or new code should be shopping them around around to the developers of existing coins, running some test net and generally look to minimize the number of coin-chains, anyone who is seeking to maximize the number of chains is in my opinion at best being irresponsible.  Only after an idea is rejected by existing coins, vetted as reliable and desired by the community is it appropriate to start a new chain.

I don't see how most new features can be added to existing coins. Say I want to test ultra-short blocks, an idea that is very popular now, mainly because it's trivial to implement in the current code. How exactly do you propose it to be integrated in bitcoin, for example?
Why should I be bothered with the developers of existing coins? I don't even know who they are. Even if an idea is compatible with some coin's current implementation (can you give an example of this?), how is it possible to persuade its developers to work on it? How a rejected idea can be vetted as reliable?
Also the community in this forum is extremely biased, because the majority are miners. They are not an indication of a coin's success, unless the coin is released specifically for forum members. Which seems to be the case for all recent coins, but a serious developer should not be influenced by this.

Keep thinking like that and alt coins will simply fade away into obscurity. Adjusting a couple of variables is not innovation, most of the time it's note even improvement.This lie that you can make a better coin without writing any new code has to be exposed.

[whitedragon]

This is an important point, most new features can be added to existing coins.  And people with new ideas or new code should be shopping them around around to the developers of existing coins, running some test net and generally look to minimize the number of coin-chains, anyone who is seeking to maximize the number of chains is in my opinion at best being irresponsible.  Only after an idea is rejected by existing coins, vetted as reliable and desired by the community is it appropriate to start a new chain.

I don't see how most new features can be added to existing coins. Say I want to test ultra-short blocks, an idea that is very popular now, mainly because it's trivial to implement in the current code. How exactly do you propose it to be integrated in bitcoin, for example?
Why should I be bothered with the developers of existing coins? I don't even know who they are. Even if an idea is compatible with some coin's current implementation (can you give an example of this?), how is it possible to persuade its developers to work on it? How a rejected idea can be vetted as reliable?
Also the community in this forum is extremely biased, because the majority are miners. They are not an indication of a coin's success, unless the coin is released specifically for forum members. Which seems to be the case for all recent coins, but a serious developer should not be influenced by this.

Keep thinking like that and alt coins will simply fade away into obscurity. Adjusting a couple of variables is not innovation, most of the time it's note even improvement.This lie that you can make a better coin without writing any new code has to be exposed.

You would think this would go without saying...unfortunately not.  I'd agree that you could tweak a coin by changing some settings...but you can't re-invent the wheel and call it revolutionary (no pun intended).

[BladeRunner]

Innovation - Irrelevant.
Number of coins - Irrelevant.
Name of coin - Irrelevant.
Fair launch - Irrelevant.
Poor Launch - Irrelevant.
Total number of alts - Irrelevant.
If they are around in two weeks - Irrelevant.
sha256/script/whatever - Irrelevant.
Trade like a boss and pay .01 BTC for first listing - Irrelevant.



Missing out on just one of them becoming as big as bitcoins did after you missed the boat 3 years ago?

Well, there my friends, Is what NOBODY wants to miss out on. Its like trying to win the lottery.

[digitalindustry]

    
"When will the madness end? "

According to the documentation about two to three hours after you stop taking the medication  .

[bitdwarf]

It does feel like this bubble is wearing off and you can start to see the winners that'll stay for the long term...

[Peter Lambert]

It does feel like this bubble is wearing off and you can start to see the winners that'll stay for the long term...

Winners: Bitcoin, Namecoin, Litecoin, ripples(maybe).

Did I miss any?