Do you think "new" Alt coins & "Blockchain" based coins are good or bad for BTC?

[Kakmakr]

I think the immediate reaction from people invested into Bitcoin would be negative, when they hear that some new Alt coin or "Blockchain" based technology was launched. You immediately think that money will flow away from Bitcoin to these Alt coins and Bitcoin will lose investors.

Could a new coin attract new investors to the whole Crypto currency scene, that would not have invested, if it was not for this coin?

Let's say for instance "Mc Donald's" launch a new Alt coin, called "McCoin" and Billions of people starts to buy and sell these coins. What would the natural spinoff of this be? I think "increased awareness" of Crypto Currencies. A percentage of these people might start to trade other Alt coins or Bitcoin as a result of this. <Big companies will kind of legitimize Crypto currencies, because people tend to trust these companies>

Do you think this is Good or Bad for Bitcoin, when this happens?  

[1715324862]

1715324862

[1715324862]

1715324862

[1715324862]

1715324862

[1715324862]

1715324862

[1715324862]

1715324862

[ReindeerOnMe]

That makes sense though Bitcoin is still alive and kicking even if a lot of new Alt coins are popping up that is actually better than Bitcoin that we know. A lot of altcoins will continue to emerge and even if that happens, I don't see Bitcoin being covered up by these altcoin since there is a lot of investors and traders that is looking forward in Bitcoin's price in the future.

[amishmanish]

I think these "Alt-coins" and "fluff blockchain" technologies have screwed up the whole thing. By now, the debate around bitcoin should have matured towards following points:

• Why governments and banks are so uneasy about a decentralized currency?
• What is it that makes them think that people transacting without the overhead of having to go through banks is an issue?
• How can a decentralized, transparent allocation of public funds can reduce inequality and bring more people out of poverty.

Instead of these mature and hard questions, we have this drama created by egoistic, greedy f***s everywhere who think they could be the next Satoshi or those who simply want to confuse more and more new people with cutting-edge sounding names and part them with their money.

Companies launching their own coins or similar paraphernalia to boost sales is nothing new. Things like points and coupons have existed for a long time. Alt-coins catering to a particular private organisation working on a private blockchain do not serve any purpose except being an easy, marketing gimmick.

The medium bitcoin has "Bitcoin: the network and the code" behind it. How do you replicate that level of network robustness and decentralization on some Alt-coin which comes up with novel Proofs-of-'whatever'? I think the alt-coins are bad for the ecosystem because they do not bring anything new to the table but instead, spread the focus of new users towards the race to finding the "next" bitcoin.

Without these gimmicks, people wouldn't be buying into all sort of crazy stuff hoping for it to grow because bitcoin has grown. Without them, the new wave of people too would have concentrated on the technology and tried to find ways for adoption through innovation. That kind of work has suffered when the majority of new people are interested in only investing, trading and flipping.

[Idrisu]

New investors will find investments opportunities in new projects especially the one that resolved a very important human problem.  I don't think that new altcoins or blockchain base technology can affect bitcoin price negatively as most of the altcoins move in the same direction with  bitcoin against other currencies. I believe the more advance in technology and new discovery the more bitcoin price go up.

[Kakmakr]

I think these "Alt-coins" and "fluff blockchain" technologies have screwed up the whole thing. By now, the debate around bitcoin should have matured towards following points:

• Why governments and banks are so uneasy about a decentralized currency?
• What is it that makes them think that people transacting without the overhead of having to go through banks is an issue?
• How can a decentralized, transparent allocation of public funds can reduce inequality and bring more people out of poverty.

Instead of these mature and hard questions, we have this drama created by egoistic, greedy f***s everywhere who think they could be the next Satoshi or those who simply want to confuse more and more new people with cutting-edge sounding names and part them with their money.

Companies launching their own coins or similar paraphernalia to boost sales is nothing new. Things like points and coupons have existed for a long time. Alt-coins catering to a particular private organisation working on a private blockchain do not serve any purpose except being an easy, marketing gimmick.

The medium bitcoin has "Bitcoin: the network and the code" behind it. How do you replicate that level of network robustness and decentralization on some Alt-coin which comes up with novel Proofs-of-'whatever'? I think the alt-coins are bad for the ecosystem because they do not bring anything new to the table but instead, spread the focus of new users towards the race to finding the "next" bitcoin.

Without these gimmicks, people wouldn't be buying into all sort of crazy stuff hoping for it to grow because bitcoin has grown. Without them, the new wave of people too would have concentrated on the technology and tried to find ways for adoption through innovation. That kind of work has suffered when the majority of new people are interested in only investing, trading and flipping.

Ok, for the sake of this discussion let's forget one moment about these ShitCoins and focus on real coins with a actual use case. This is why I used the "McCoin" example, because I know this coin will have a actual network of users behind them that would use these coins as a currency and buy and trade it, because they want to use it. <Not purely for the speculative side of it>

Yes, I agree these ShitCoins adds zero value, but some of the coins with real world use case and big companies backing it, might add some value and the spin off might be good for Bitcoin.  

[ralle14]

Altcoins are good for Bitcoin because as what you've said they have the option to trade their alts for Bitcoin since exchanges will always add that kind of market first before putting another one for alts. If their trusted altcoin goes crashing they could opt to move to Bitcoin if they want. Also these alts can be used for experiments I remember reading a thread/article where a certain coin (might be litecoin) was being used as a testcoin before implementing it on Bitcoin.

[aso118]

I think the immediate reaction from people invested into Bitcoin would be negative, when they hear that some new Alt coin or "Blockchain" based technology was launched. You immediately think that money will flow away from Bitcoin to these Alt coins and Bitcoin will lose investors.

Could a new coin attract new investors to the whole Crypto currency scene, that would not have invested, if it was not for this coin?

Let's say for instance "Mc Donald's" launch a new Alt coin, called "McCoin" and Billions of people starts to buy and sell these coins. What would the natural spinoff of this be? I think "increased awareness" of Crypto Currencies. A percentage of these people might start to trade other Alt coins or Bitcoin as a result of this. <Big companies will kind of legitimize Crypto currencies, because people tend to trust these companies>

Do you think this is Good or Bad for Bitcoin, when this happens?  

The thousands of altcoins being launched really have no basis / business model / utility behind them. The only point of these coins is to raise money for their developers from unsuspecting investors. When the bubble bursts, these investors will lose faith in all cryptocurrencies. Of course, coins like the hypothetical McCoin wouldn't fall in this category.

[aardvark15]

It’s hard to tell what the ultimate impact of altcoins will be on Bitcoin.

On the one hand, they are competition for Bitcoin and may take away some of Bitcoin’s share of this investment space. But on the other hand, Bitcoin isn’t capable of doing everything, so altcoins can open up whole new ideas that can make cryptocurrencies more attractive in general to investors.

And these centralized cryptocurrencies that are run by business may not be competitors at all to decentralized cryptos like Bitcoin.

[krishnapramod]

Ok, for the sake of this discussion let's forget one moment about these ShitCoins and focus on real coins with a actual use case. This is why I used the "McCoin" example, because I know this coin will have a actual network of users behind them that would use these coins as a currency and buy and trade it, because they want to use it. <Not purely for the speculative side of it>

Yes, I agree these ShitCoins adds zero value, but some of the coins with real world use case and big companies backing it, might add some value and the spin off might be good for Bitcoin.  

Real businesses/corporations launching their own corporate coins. With an existing revenue-generating business model, well-established reputation and a large user base, McDonald's wouldn't have much issue building a token economy for their business and user engagement would depend on how the use case of their token will be defined, limited to McDonald's only or much broader.

As far as, would these corporate coins add some value or be good for Bitcoin, this analogy might be flawed, but IMO, corporate coins would just be an extension of their corporate shares. Yeah definitely, shares to a cryptocurrency, the whole use case changes and importantly accessibility. It has been reported that Facebook is planning to launch their cryptocurrency. I think there are a good number of crypto users who before entering the crypto market didn't had any experience dealing with stocks/shares. Now hypothetically if Facebook launches their own cryptocurrency would these users buy it? Definitely, it is giving them an opportunity to own a part of a well-established corporation and allowing them to trade it in an emerging volatile crypto market.

I have no idea how the structure of corporate coins would be, too centralized or borderline decentralized, but IMO even with all the data/privacy/censorship issues, a Facebook cryptocurrency will get adopted, the whole crypto market doesn’t work on trust, decentralization, or ideology. Would corporate coins contribute to spreading the word about cryptocurrencies/Blockchain? It's a possibility and in turn could be good for the overall crypto market. With all the regulatory uncertainty, it could be some time before we see a corporate coin.

[gabmen]

I think the immediate reaction from people invested into Bitcoin would be negative, when they hear that some new Alt coin or "Blockchain" based technology was launched. You immediately think that money will flow away from Bitcoin to these Alt coins and Bitcoin will lose investors.

Could a new coin attract new investors to the whole Crypto currency scene, that would not have invested, if it was not for this coin?

Let's say for instance "Mc Donald's" launch a new Alt coin, called "McCoin" and Billions of people starts to buy and sell these coins. What would the natural spinoff of this be? I think "increased awareness" of Crypto Currencies. A percentage of these people might start to trade other Alt coins or Bitcoin as a result of this. <Big companies will kind of legitimize Crypto currencies, because people tend to trust these companies>

Do you think this is Good or Bad for Bitcoin, when this happens?  

Well i don't actually feel that way since i haven't yet heard of any alt that warranted that much attention. It's not easy to promote alts especially during these times when everyone is asked to be cautious because of frauds and scams. I don't anything from ghe crypto market right to now challenge btc's dominance

[Tory-Tory]

I think the situation described by you badly affects the growth rate of bitcoin. Money really flows into altcoyins. At reflection it is necessary to consider that fact, that with growth of the market quantity of investment funds and large players which buy mainly bitcoin grows. Therefore, there is a chance that the dominance of bitcoin will remain the same. Moreover, for me, bitcoin remains the only reliable crypto currency, which has the properties of an investment asset for preserving capital, rather than gaining instant profit, as it works with the altcoins.

[Kakmakr]

Ok, for the sake of this discussion let's forget one moment about these ShitCoins and focus on real coins with a actual use case. This is why I used the "McCoin" example, because I know this coin will have a actual network of users behind them that would use these coins as a currency and buy and trade it, because they want to use it. <Not purely for the speculative side of it>

Yes, I agree these ShitCoins adds zero value, but some of the coins with real world use case and big companies backing it, might add some value and the spin off might be good for Bitcoin.  

Real businesses/corporations launching their own corporate coins. With an existing revenue-generating business model, well-established reputation and a large user base, McDonald's wouldn't have much issue building a token economy for their business and user engagement would depend on how the use case of their token will be defined, limited to McDonald's only or much broader.

As far as, would these corporate coins add some value or be good for Bitcoin, this analogy might be flawed, but IMO, corporate coins would just be an extension of their corporate shares. Yeah definitely, shares to a cryptocurrency, the whole use case changes and importantly accessibility. It has been reported that Facebook is planning to launch their cryptocurrency. I think there are a good number of crypto users who before entering the crypto market didn't had any experience dealing with stocks/shares. Now hypothetically if Facebook launches their own cryptocurrency would these users buy it? Definitely, it is giving them an opportunity to own a part of a well-established corporation and allowing them to trade it in an emerging volatile crypto market.

I have no idea how the structure of corporate coins would be, too centralized or borderline decentralized, but IMO even with all the data/privacy/censorship issues, a Facebook cryptocurrency will get adopted, the whole crypto market doesn’t work on trust, decentralization, or ideology. Would corporate coins contribute to spreading the word about cryptocurrencies/Blockchain? It's a possibility and in turn could be good for the overall crypto market. With all the regulatory uncertainty, it could be some time before we see a corporate coin.

I do not agree with you that Crypto currencies would be perceived as a share by the customers. I would rather compare the Crypto currency to some discount voucher or loyalty program points, than to shares. The customers will trade the tokens, but they will not own a share in the company.

The only influence in the share price would be directly after the announcement that the company would be launching a coin like this. If the company pre-mined the coin, their revenue would increase with a small margin, when they sell those coins.

[hualangktsld841]

Many people just stay in the negative news for the new altcoin. I think the new altcoin is good for bitcoin development. The community needs expansion and there must be many new altcoin so that the whole industry can expand faster.

[ronics]

New investors can find opportunities to invest in new projects, especially each that solves the most crucial problem with people in bitcoin. I do not think that new altcoins or blockchain based on technology can affect the price of bitcoin negatively because most altcoins are switching to the same destination with bitcoin against different currencies. I believe the technology is more developed and the new discovery is the more bitcoin price.

[Tankdestroyer]

Let's say for instance "Mc Donald's" launch a new Alt coin, called "McCoin" and Billions of people starts to buy and sell these coins. What would the natural spinoff of this be? I think "increased awareness" of Crypto Currencies.
Do you think this is Good or Bad for Bitcoin, when this happens?  

I think it will be good for bitcoin even if centralized companies starts to create a cryptocurrency of their own after all, it can only be used to purchase goods and services rendered by the companies who issued a particular cryptocurrency. That's where bitcoin can come in, they can use bitcoin or any good crypto as a medium to pay these services via conversion services that can be accessed easily allowing fast conversion of btc or any decentralized crypto to a particular centralized crypto(in your example's case, it would be McCoin).

[ladydark]

I think that its good for bitcoin because more people who don't even know about bitcoin but about the company which is going to launch new coins.By this way,the word about bitcoin would spread sooner thereby increasing its demand and price.

[PsylockReborn]

I think the immediate reaction from people invested into Bitcoin would be negative, when they hear that some new Alt coin or "Blockchain" based technology was launched. You immediately think that money will flow away from Bitcoin to these Alt coins and Bitcoin will lose investors.

Could a new coin attract new investors to the whole Crypto currency scene, that would not have invested, if it was not for this coin?

Let's say for instance "Mc Donald's" launch a new Alt coin, called "McCoin" and Billions of people starts to buy and sell these coins. What would the natural spinoff of this be? I think "increased awareness" of Crypto Currencies. A percentage of these people might start to trade other Alt coins or Bitcoin as a result of this. <Big companies will kind of legitimize Crypto currencies, because people tend to trust these companies>

Do you think this is Good or Bad for Bitcoin, when this happens?  

It will create a positive effect to Bitcoin since it is the first cryptocurrency ever created and none of those altcoins would exist if Bitcoin wasn't invented in the first place. Even if there are millions of new altcoins coming in and trying to replace bitcoin or correct bitcoin's flaws, BTC will remain the king of all coins because of the mere fact that it has already proven its performance in the market and it is considered as the best store of value of all the cryptocurrencies.

There are still lots of people who have no knowledge about bitcoin, so its one way of advertising bitcoin through a new cryptocurrency or project. In every cryptocurrency that is being made, bitcoin will always be the basis of them all. Those altcoins were made out of bitcoin's flaws so with these new innovations ( new altcoins or project ) it is one way as well of getting the word out of how awesome blockchain technology is as well as bitcoin as the first application of this greatest invention.

[mylyn2327]

I think new altcoin can caused good to bitcoin, because we can't still seperate the fact that most of the alts are trade to bitcoin. New alts means new opportunity to bitcoin, it can be a way to introduce bitcoin to people and of course to attract more investors.

[amishmanish]

--snip--
As far as, would these corporate coins add some value or be good for Bitcoin, this analogy might be flawed, but IMO, corporate coins would just be an extension of their corporate shares. Yeah definitely, shares to a cryptocurrency, the whole use case changes and importantly accessibility. It has been reported that Facebook is planning to launch their cryptocurrency.

I have no idea how the structure of corporate coins would be, too centralized or borderline decentralized, but IMO even with all the data/privacy/censorship issues, a Facebook cryptocurrency will get adopted,

I do not agree with you that Crypto currencies would be perceived as a share by the customers. I would rather compare the Crypto currency to some discount voucher or loyalty program points, than to shares. The customers will trade the tokens, but they will not own a share in the company.
--snip--

Alright. Lets consider them for a moment. I can't see them as being shares or as loyalty points either. The use case will be different for different companies using such private blockchains. In case of facebook what could they possibly do?
People generate content on Facebook. A lot of it. Facebook has recently received a lot of flak for letting user data be used for commercial purposes without user consent. If Facebook launches a blockchain based token, it may be a method for them to incentivize users for allowing their data to be shared.  Say you have a few privacy settings and you get points every week on your facebook activity. The more private you make your account, your stakes get lowered and vice versa. This'll give them a good excuse to keep using the data while the people get something out of it.

I don't think it'll be that great for bitcoin. You cannot expect a corporate like Facebook to care about decentralization or the economic paradigm shifting properties of Bitcoin. Mark Zuckerberg is a technologist himself but I guess, being a billionaire presiding over an empire does changes things. Those ideals get sidelined when you have are so well integrated with the system. Blockchain based products from such established corporations like Facebook or McDonald's may be a body blow to bitcoin. It is clear that the majority of users don't give a rat's ass about decentralization or any long term goals. All they care about is getting some dough.

You can expect the apathy to multiply manifold once such blockchains running on private servers gain acceptance. Most people will simply use them rather than try to explore the privacy and freedom related aspect of a truly trustless currency like bitcoin.

[krishnapramod]

--snip--
As far as, would these corporate coins add some value or be good for Bitcoin, this analogy might be flawed, but IMO, corporate coins would just be an extension of their corporate shares. Yeah definitely, shares to a cryptocurrency, the whole use case changes and importantly accessibility. It has been reported that Facebook is planning to launch their cryptocurrency.

I have no idea how the structure of corporate coins would be, too centralized or borderline decentralized, but IMO even with all the data/privacy/censorship issues, a Facebook cryptocurrency will get adopted,

I do not agree with you that Crypto currencies would be perceived as a share by the customers. I would rather compare the Crypto currency to some discount voucher or loyalty program points, than to shares. The customers will trade the tokens, but they will not own a share in the company.
--snip--

Alright. Lets consider them for a moment. I can't see them as being shares or as loyalty points either. The use case will be different for different companies using such private blockchains. In case of facebook what could they possibly do?
People generate content on Facebook. A lot of it. Facebook has recently received a lot of flak for letting user data be used for commercial purposes without user consent. If Facebook launches a blockchain based token, it may be a method for them to incentivize users for allowing their data to be shared.  Say you have a few privacy settings and you get points every week on your facebook activity. The more private you make your account, your stakes get lowered and vice versa. This'll give them a good excuse to keep using the data while the people get something out of it.

I don't think it'll be that great for bitcoin. You cannot expect a corporate like Facebook to care about decentralization or the economic paradigm shifting properties of Bitcoin. Mark Zuckerberg is a technologist himself but I guess, being a billionaire presiding over an empire does changes things. Those ideals get sidelined when you have are so well integrated with the system. Blockchain based products from such established corporations like Facebook or McDonald's may be a body blow to bitcoin. It is clear that the majority of users don't give a rat's ass about decentralization or any long term goals. All they care about is getting some dough.

You can expect the apathy to multiply manifold once such blockchains running on private servers gain acceptance. Most people will simply use them rather than try to explore the privacy and freedom related aspect of a truly trustless currency like bitcoin.

Last year, in Novemeber an article was published on Hackernoon titled, The Facebook Cryptocurrency that Mark Zuckerberg Should Launch. It was before Zuckerberg said that he was looking into Blockchain technology. One of the suggestions made by the author,

At some point, Facebook could link that supply of digital currency to the stockholders, so that the stockholders have stock as well as the currency, or Facebook could pay out the currency as a dividend. Even more extreme would be if Facebook gave the coin in proportional share to the stockholders and forgot about their stock altogether. Then, hypothetically, all users and shareholders would be joined together as the owners of Facebook, and any transaction economy that it creates.

Yeah, a bit absurd and considering the very centralized business model of corporations, definitely too far-fetched.

Apart from pre-mined, the article also mentions airdrops, Facebook launching their own exchange, buybacks, and a few hypothetical possibilities on how a big corporation like Facebook with more than 2 billion users could build their token economy and monetize it.

A couple of years ago, there were no decentralized alternatives to Facebook/Twitter, but we do have them now, although the userbase is too small. Decentralization is a paradigm shift, but the approach taken by most of the decentralized Blockchain projects to decentralize everything isn't going to show any immediate results, it's a slow process. Yeah, people who don't care about their data privacy, security would use centralized cryptocurrencies backed by the so called corporations, but those who care, now have the choice to use decentralized versions with absolute privacy and security, wouldn't they use it? And as more decentralized platforms targeting different sectors are built, more decentralized choices people are going to have, adoption will be slow, but ultimately there would be a parallel decentralized economy.

https://hackernoon.com/facebook-could-launch-the-ultimate-cryptocurrency-2e6a5b65665b

PS: Not vouching for any centralized shitcoin.