Why is litecoin hyped so much when it doesn't add any value over bitcoin?

[coinerd]

I sometimes wonder if satoshi didn't bail because he saw BTC getting too big to be safe. He left before it was even finished.

This first crypto-currency and low-capacity block chain are  lovely proof of concept and wonderful educational tools.

Ready to secure a 1b market cap? Its doing OK so far. By 10b we will have "account creation" FPGAs and maybe ASICs hunting for key collisions. Knowing there are 1b USD + accounts it might be nearly as enticing to brute force for keys as it is to SOLOmine for the network.

Able to become the "world currency" like some idealists here seem to hope?  not ever. Not even possible for the bitcoin blockchain to support 1% of global commerce.  The backbone model has more sustainability but it will never be more than one of many options.

Litecoin, a copy of bitcoin but more wasteful to secure (on purpose).  More wasteful to secure but just as easy (well simple if not easy) to attack.

Where do you see that going?

[Buffer Overflow]

Go look at the BTC blockchain. Its been so close to being forked and 51%'ed recently, its insane.

When did this catastrophic near miss attack happen then? and by whom? First I've heard of it.

[coretechs]

Until either of them is broken, I see them both staying.  There is plenty of room for both BTC and LTC and one doesn't necessarily take anything away from the other.  The market will sort through the clones and value them accordingly.

I've always thought that BTC will be able to function as a "gold standard" for future crypto-currencies.  LTC can serve the intended role of "silver" in that regard, and I think it's beneficial that mining LTC is currently more CPU/GPU friendly for the second generation of miners/supporters.  I think we will see future micro-payment networks that will reference this generation of crypto-currencies to establish base values, but we have a long way to go before prices stabilize and global trust in peer-to-peer currencies is sufficient.

[erk]

And you have the 51% security issues with BTC vs. LTC. Go look at the BTC blockchain. Its been so close to being forked and 51%'ed recently, its insane. Bitcoin purists don't want to admit it, but hitting 6 blocks in a row for a medium-sized ASIC company would be much, MUCH easier than doing the same on Litecoin.

Exactly the same 51% attack issue exists in LTC, the main difference is you have less time between confirms to pull it off. Both coins will probably get hit by it one day as large pools start to centralize the hashing power.

If everyone solo mined it wouldn't be an issue, but most people point at a stratum proxy which is very simple to redirect to wherever you want, redirecting the entire pool's hasting power in an instant.

[bitcoiners]

Litecoin is backed by hopium and jealousy.

Hm... Can't wait to see the articles in Bitcoin magazine about Litecoin when it goes to Gox.

[Brunic]

Mining is about the initial distribution of the coin. If you want to distribute something and make it a success, it NEEDS to be accessible.

Right now, even if you pay thousands of dollars and wait 1 year, it doesn't even guarantee you'll get an ASIC. It means that the next 50% of Bitcoin distribution (since we are around half-way there) is going to go into the hands a few elites. Litecoin mining though is easily accessible and the distribution of coins will be into a lot more hands. It means that there is less new people getting BTC through mining and more people getting LTC through mining. Bitcoin has the advantage right now, but reducing the number of points of entry into the economy is not a way of developing an healthy economy.

Exchanges are ok, but I'm not sure they can compensate right now for the current lack of mining accessibility. It's easier to try out this "new coin thing" downloading free software to test with your GPU than going to a private website where you need to send real money and identification to have the luxury of trying out this "new coin thing". And I'm not even talking about exchanges shutting down (Bitcoin-24? Bitfloor?) or simply having high fees (Virtex...).

Overall, I don't see why people are surprised that putting heavy "regulations" like the ASIC requirement is slowing down the market. Putting high barriers of entry slow down any market, it's the intended effect. Litecoin is simply a clone of Bitcoin with less "regulations" on its market. Since a lot of people around here like it when there is less regulations and barriers, Litecoin is like a breath of fresh air and it adds to the hype.

[erk]

Overall, I don't see why people are surprised that putting heavy "regulations" like the ASIC requirement is slowing down the market. Putting high barriers of entry slow down any market, it's the intended effect. Litecoin is simply a clone of Bitcoin with less "regulations" on its market. Since a lot of people around here like it when there is less regulations and barriers, Litecoin is like a breath of fresh air and it adds to the hype.

And who exactly is doing this "regulation" of the market?

[TECHICENINE]

Overall, I don't see why people are surprised that putting heavy "regulations" like the ASIC requirement is slowing down the market. Putting high barriers of entry slow down any market, it's the intended effect. Litecoin is simply a clone of Bitcoin with less "regulations" on its market. Since a lot of people around here like it when there is less regulations and barriers, Litecoin is like a breath of fresh air and it adds to the hype.

And who exactly is doing this "regulation" of the market?

monkey market makers maken move$$$..lol

[foggyb]

Ready to secure a 1b market cap? Its doing OK so far. By 10b we will have "account creation" FPGAs and maybe ASICs hunting for key collisions. Knowing there are 1b USD + accounts it might be nearly as enticing to brute force for keys as it is to SOLOmine for the network.

It "might not be". It is mind-numbingly "impossible" to get a key collision. Using an ASIC for this? You might as well use a Nvidia GTX 440, the relative odds are not much worse, and its a heck of a lot cheaper. You are not understanding the scale of difficult that is at play here.

Its like you buying 100 lottery tickets instead of just 1, and banking on winning the big one . . . . . with the odds of winning at 1 in a million million quadrillion.

[FiiNALiZE]

Ready to secure a 1b market cap? Its doing OK so far. By 10b we will have "account creation" FPGAs and maybe ASICs hunting for key collisions. Knowing there are 1b USD + accounts it might be nearly as enticing to brute force for keys as it is to SOLOmine for the network.

It "might not be". It is mind-numbingly "impossible" to get a key collision. Using an ASIC for this? You might as well use a Nvidia GTX 440, the chances are not much worse and its a heck of a lot cheaper. You are not understanding the scale of difficult that is at play here.

Wait till quantum computers become mainsteam.

Every known algorithm could be broken, who knows.

With the speed that processing power is increasing these days, it's not insane to say that SHA-256 might be broken in a few years.

[foggyb]

Wait till quantum computers become mainsteam.

Every known algorithm could be broken, who knows.

With the speed that processing power is increasing these days, it's not insane to say that SHA-256 might be broken in a few years.

You do know encryption algorithms can be upgraded....right?

Besides...

SHA-256 can't be brute forced in your lifetime if the entire universe's matter were used to build a perfect supercomputer.

It would have to be some kind of bug in SHA-256.

[FiiNALiZE]

Wait till quantum computers become mainsteam.

Every known algorithm could be broken, who knows.

With the speed that processing power is increasing these days, it's not insane to say that SHA-256 might be broken in a few years.

You do know encryption algorithms can be upgraded....right?

Which is assuming the old ones have been broken.....which is ENORMOUS problem for the whole world. No one gives a shit about bitcoin yet. They do care about banking security though.

Except you just can't upgrade the entire BTC blockchain, you'll need a new coin.

Besides, every algorithm can be broken.

If you create an algorithm that is not just impossible to break at the time of creation, but also thousands of years in the future, then you'll win the Noble Prize.

That is the downside of crypto. Every time an algorithm get's broken, a new one has to take its place.

Take a look at Moore's law and how fast processing power is increasing these days.

[foggyb]

Sorry, but you're completely wrong.

Also, Moore's law will not continue forever. We can't break the laws of physics. We've done great for 40 years or so. But there is a limit....

[FiiNALiZE]

Sorry, but you're completely wrong. On all counts.

Last 40 years: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/00/Transistor_Count_and_Moore%27s_Law_-_2011.svg

Quantum computers are coming out now.

What do you think the processing power is going to be in a few years? Decades?

Don't be blind to how fast the world is advancing.

[Diamondstarfall]

By the time SHA-256 is broken (if); by then there will exist an even more secure encryption algo, and the ability for bitcoin to switch to if needed.

[foggyb]

Sorry, but you're completely wrong. On all counts.

Last 40 years: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/00/Transistor_Count_and_Moore%27s_Law_-_2011.svg

Quantum computers are coming out now.

What do you think the processing power is going to be in a few years? Decades?

Don't be blind to how fast the world is advancing.

You're looking at the past, not the future.

[FiiNALiZE]

Sorry, but you're completely wrong. On all counts.

Last 40 years: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/00/Transistor_Count_and_Moore%27s_Law_-_2011.svg

Quantum computers are coming out now.

What do you think the processing power is going to be in a few years? Decades?

Don't be blind to how fast the world is advancing.

You're looking at the past, not the future.

And looking at the past helps predict the future.

[FiiNALiZE]

Sorry, but you're completely wrong. On all counts.

Last 40 years: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/00/Transistor_Count_and_Moore%27s_Law_-_2011.svg

Quantum computers are coming out now.

What do you think the processing power is going to be in a few years? Decades?

Don't be blind to how fast the world is advancing.

You're looking at the past, not the future.

And looking at the past helps predict the future.

A random guess at the future has a better chance of being right than a prediction.

You know there's a reason why they teach kids history in school and why people study history.

Events in history usually repeat themselves, and you can find patterns that help with predictions.

But if you feel that way, then alright.

[foggyb]

You know there's a reason why they teach kids history in school and why people study history.

Events in history usually repeat themselves, and you can find patterns that help with predictions.

But if you feel that way, then alright.

We teach history in order to learn from peoples mistakes, not repeat them.

Imagine I had two rabbits in a cage, and they multiply at 200% a year, how many years will it take to cover the earth 3 feet deep in rabbits?

[Brunic]

Overall, I don't see why people are surprised that putting heavy "regulations" like the ASIC requirement is slowing down the market. Putting high barriers of entry slow down any market, it's the intended effect. Litecoin is simply a clone of Bitcoin with less "regulations" on its market. Since a lot of people around here like it when there is less regulations and barriers, Litecoin is like a breath of fresh air and it adds to the hype.

And who exactly is doing this "regulation" of the market?

Nobody in particular. It's the result of introducing a disruptive technology with limited access into the SHA-256 mining market. It's crazy hard to enter it while it's really easy to get kicked out of it. Sure, the difficulty number goes higher, but I strongly doubt the total number of miners is growing.