Why no one has the balls to make a new SHA256 ?

[MashRinx]

Scrypt is technologically superior to SHA-256 as far as cryptos go. There's no reason to use SHA-256 anymore.

The first statement may be true.  The second is not.

[bitdwarf]

Did you mean MD5 instead of MD4?

No.

[DeathProxy]

No way, unless the you have asic miners ready to protect your new coin.

[YacLives]

Because itll just get asic bombed. How the fuck is that lacking balls? Thats called foresight.

Bro can you just help me understand why someone who paid so much and waited so long for a asic miner

would turn to a new SHA coin when they have more of a chance of getting close to ROI, hashing BTC?

And the logic in pointing their asics to a new coin knowing it would destroy it and most probably leaving them with useless coins anyway?

Because HAZARD im sure im missing something that your not, can you help me out here by explaining this logic cause its not the first time ive seen you say it

Thanks in advance

[Diamondstarfall]

I have been researching on merge mining more and more, I believe coins could be beneficial if they could be merge mined with bitcoin.

[Hazard]

Because itll just get asic bombed. How the fuck is that lacking balls? Thats called foresight.

Bro can you just help me understand why someone who paid so much and waited so long for a asic miner

would turn to a new SHA coin when they have more of a chance of getting close to ROI, hashing BTC?

And the logic in pointing their asics to a new coin knowing it would destroy it and most probably leaving them with useless coins anyway?

Because HAZARD im sure im missing something that your not, can you help me out here by explaining this logic cause its not the first time ive seen you say it

Thanks in advance

That's the goal, to kill the coin. A 51% attack is trivial with an ASIC. Stalling the network is trivial with an ASIC. There's really no reason to use SHA256 because it opens the door for these type of attacks. And they have happened to other coins before (most recently, terracoin comes to mind).

Using SHA256 puts the all power in the hands of the technologically elite and privileged few. Why do it?

[YacLives]

Because itll just get asic bombed. How the fuck is that lacking balls? Thats called foresight.

Bro can you just help me understand why someone who paid so much and waited so long for a asic miner

would turn to a new SHA coin when they have more of a chance of getting close to ROI, hashing BTC?

And the logic in pointing their asics to a new coin knowing it would destroy it and most probably leaving them with useless coins anyway?

Because HAZARD im sure im missing something that your not, can you help me out here by explaining this logic cause its not the first time ive seen you say it

Thanks in advance

That's the goal, to kill the coin. A 51% attack is trivial with an ASIC. Stalling the network is trivial with an ASIC. There's really no reason to use SHA256 because it opens the door for these type of attacks. And they have happened to other coins before (most recently, terracoin comes to mind).

Using SHA256 puts the all power in the hands of the technologically elite and privileged few. Why do it?

Ok thanks, then i guess someone would have balls to release one, but in doing so would actually be interesting and might just stand as a reminder to anyone thinking of trying in the future
and i know foresight forces us to be rational and not even attempt it but hey, why not encourage it and see what happens.

Hell why dont you release one just for the lulz

it would certainly be a great way to make an example of it and you are great at launching coins and i mean that genuinely and of course i think it would be fun

[digitalindustry]

Because itll just get asic bombed. How the fuck is that lacking balls? Thats called foresight.

+1

Holy shit, wow , just wow , you know what , I get up every day , and the world never fails to surprise me.

[markm]

I thought there had already been a few new SHA256-based coins. Terracoin? Bytecoin?

But there are so many existing SHA256-based coins you can mine without diverting your hashing away from bitcoin that they seem kind of pointless.

if you aren't even collecting all the "free" namecoins, devcoins, groupcoins, ixcoins, i0coins, coiledcoins and geistgeld you can get by merged mining why even think about lowering your rate of aquisition of all of those, including bitcoin/ Its not as if some of those are not themselves already considered obscure, nor as if none of those have fast block rates. So there is nothing to gain by making yet another ixcoin clone or i0coin clone or coiledcoin clone or geistgeld (fast blocks) clone or whatever, especially if you are even going to be qable to merged-mine it.

Some of those merged coins are still ridiculously low difficulty too, so small miners can mine them much better than they can mine some new instamining crap that gets jumped on instantly by lots of hash power. Small miners have been mining some of these coins for years without any hassles from big mining farms.

-MarkM-

[jackjack]

Why no one has the balls to make a new SHA256 ?

Do it yourself, signature whore

[crazy_rabbit]

Just use Bitcoin Testnet. Save yourself the trouble.

[jackjack]

Re: Why no one has the balls to make a new SHA256 ?

Just use Bitcoin Testnet. Save yourself the trouble.

You could keep your testnet valuation spam in threads that are at least a tiny bit related to testnet 

[Hydroponica]

Why no one has the balls to make a new SHA256 ?

ASIC miners