[ANN] Litecoin - a lite version of Bitcoin. Launched!

[Fuzzy]

I still think there is a strong argument for the 'silver' to BTC 'gold'. I wouldn't be surprised if BTC ends up being so successful that the 21 million limit in coins turns out to look rather small. Yes of course it's divisible down many decimal places, but if people really end up using it for millions if not billions of transactions, people are going to have a hard time keeping track of how many 0's they have to put in their transactions.

This is exactly why LTC needs a decimal shift while it's still early. I doubt people will use BitCoins for everyday transactions once the BTC is worth $100 or so. Again, too many zeros.

If LTC had a limit of 840 million or even 8.4 billion, it could easily become a day-to-day small purchase currency. It's all about perception. I'm not going to sell my computer for 0.003 BTC, but if it were 500 LTC, that would be perceived as a fair trade. An 84 million coin limit just isn't enough to do that with.

Either another currency will come along to serve that role, or LTC will shift the decimal.

You have to keep in mind that the 21 million BTC limit was a purely experimental value. In hindsight it is way too low to be used as a world-wide currency, which is why you need a much higher limit if you intend of having one that people will use on a daily basis.

[1714304256]

1714304256

[DILLIGAF]

You have to keep in mind that the 21 million BTC limit was a purely experimental value. In hindsight it is way too low to be used as a world-wide currency, which is why you need a much higher limit if you intend of having one that people will use on a daily basis.

That is a whole number bias if .00000001 btc were worth $1 then those 1 btc are now $10M multiply that by 21M and you have hell of a big number more than enough to run the world on..

[Fuzzy]

You have to keep in mind that the 21 million BTC limit was a purely experimental value. In hindsight it is way too low to be used as a world-wide currency, which is why you need a much higher limit if you intend of having one that people will use on a daily basis.

That is a whole number bias if .00000001 btc were worth $1 then those 1 btc are now $10M multiply that by 21M and you have hell of a big number more than enough to run the world on..

I think you're overestimating the general populace if you assume they're above "whole number bias".
Although, you could mask the decimal in the transaction software by simply calling 0.00000001 BTC as a whole unit of something else (like the satoshi or whatever), where you will eventually run into the issue of the lowest possible transaction, the way the dollar currency is limited to a minimum 1 cent transaction.


Let me try and work this muddle of zeros out into words.

21,000,000.00000000 can be divided into 2,100,000,000,000,000 whole units. That's 2.1 quadrillion, or 2100 trillion, or 2.1 million billion. In which case you're probably right, that seems enough to run the world on.

Even if you account for the lowest possible transaction being 1 cent instead of 1 Dollar, you now have 21 trillion individual units, each divisible into "cents".

If anything this "software mask" would paint Litecoin into a rather useless corner. And if Bitcoin institutions allow for instant transactions, the 2.5 minute blocks will do nothing better, except bloat the block chain history.

Puzzling 

[EskimoBob]

I think you guys are getting worked up over a very distant "problem".
There is one at our doorstep right now, that needs immediate attention -  huge tx history, we have to drag along in massive .dat files.

Please, do not start yapping about the low cost of HDD and web wallets and what not.
It takes forever to get the clean install going (new bitcoin install has become a really painful experience) and if LTC takes off, we will be at the same spot.
Sooner it gets fixed, better it is.

[Gabi]

However, GPU hostility is impossible to do with Litecoin, as that sort of change would create a whole new chain/network.

Just for the sake of clarity, it is possible to change the algorithm without restarting the chain, it just takes some coding.
The real problem would be devising a hashing algorithm that is more GPU-hostile and ASIC-hostile than scrypt and that is at the same time immune to cryptographic attacks.

Nothing is ASIC hostile. Nothing.
Go read again the definition of ASIC please 

[Fuzzy]

However, GPU hostility is impossible to do with Litecoin, as that sort of change would create a whole new chain/network.

Just for the sake of clarity, it is possible to change the algorithm without restarting the chain, it just takes some coding.
The real problem would be devising a hashing algorithm that is more GPU-hostile and ASIC-hostile than scrypt and that is at the same time immune to cryptographic attacks.

Nothing is ASIC hostile. Nothing.
Go read again the definition of ASIC please 

I think he meant Bitcoin-purpose ASIC. ie, keep Bitcoin hardware from mining LTC effectively

[pooler]

Nothing is ASIC hostile. Nothing.
Go read again the definition of ASIC please 

It is my understanding that, in terms of cost-effectiveness, scrypt can be regarded as relatively ASIC-hostile.
Of course you could design a fast (relative to a desktop CPU/GPU) ASIC for scrypt, but because of the memory requirements of scrypt wouldn't it turn out to be way more expensive than a fast ASIC for, say, SHA-256?

[kano]

I get around 80KH with my CPUs to mine LTC, I think it's pretty good when you consider the alternative is idle CPU.

If your electricity is free, then yes. OTHERWISE, you're better off taking the money you'd spend on the extra electricity cost of running your CPU at 100%, and buying the LTC that way.

I agree but its very difficult to buy LTC with cash at the moment unless your going via the route of GBP>BTC>LTC.

Which ... increases the value of LTC ...

[matthewh3]

I get around 80KH with my CPUs to mine LTC, I think it's pretty good when you consider the alternative is idle CPU.

If your electricity is free, then yes. OTHERWISE, you're better off taking the money you'd spend on the extra electricity cost of running your CPU at 100%, and buying the LTC that way.

I agree but its very difficult to buy LTC with cash at the moment unless your going via the route of GBP>BTC>LTC.

Which ... increases the value of LTC ...

I think if MtGox and Intersango added LTC exchanges making it easier to turn "hard" cash into LTC then the value would rise.

[crazy_rabbit]

I think you guys are getting worked up over a very distant "problem".
There is one at our doorstep right now, that needs immediate attention -  huge tx history, we have to drag along in massive .dat files.

Please, do not start yapping about the low cost of HDD and web wallets and what not.
It takes forever to get the clean install going (new bitcoin install has become a really painful experience) and if LTC takes off, we will be at the same spot.
Sooner it gets fixed, better it is.

Agreed.

[crazy_rabbit]

You have to keep in mind that the 21 million BTC limit was a purely experimental value. In hindsight it is way too low to be used as a world-wide currency, which is why you need a much higher limit if you intend of having one that people will use on a daily basis.

That is a whole number bias if .00000001 btc were worth $1 then those 1 btc are now $10M multiply that by 21M and you have hell of a big number more than enough to run the world on..

I think you're overestimating the general populace if you assume they're above "whole number bias".
Although, you could mask the decimal in the transaction software by simply calling 0.00000001 BTC as a whole unit of something else (like the satoshi or whatever), where you will eventually run into the issue of the lowest possible transaction, the way the dollar currency is limited to a minimum 1 cent transaction.


Let me try and work this muddle of zeros out into words.

21,000,000.00000000 can be divided into 2,100,000,000,000,000 whole units. That's 2.1 quadrillion, or 2100 trillion, or 2.1 million billion. In which case you're probably right, that seems enough to run the world on.

Even if you account for the lowest possible transaction being 1 cent instead of 1 Dollar, you now have 21 trillion individual units, each divisible into "cents".

If anything this "software mask" would paint Litecoin into a rather useless corner. And if Bitcoin institutions allow for instant transactions, the 2.5 minute blocks will do nothing better, except bloat the block chain history.

Puzzling 

Is 2100 trillion really enough? If the GDP of the US was 15 Trillion dollars last year, and each of those dollars is divisible by 100 cents, that's a lot of 'units' (more zero's then I care to write).

Wikipedia says the total money supply in circulation of the world was 4 trillion in 2008 which had doubled from 2 trillion only 6 years prior (and had doubled from only 1 trillion 12 years before that). They don't mention the current estimated money in circulation, one could perhaps guess that it's up to 8 trillion depending on how the recession has panned out.

Maybe our incredibly large number won't stay so incredibly large for as long as we might think.

[DILLIGAF]

You have to keep in mind that the 21 million BTC limit was a purely experimental value. In hindsight it is way too low to be used as a world-wide currency, which is why you need a much higher limit if you intend of having one that people will use on a daily basis.

That is a whole number bias if .00000001 btc were worth $1 then those 1 btc are now $10M multiply that by 21M and you have hell of a big number more than enough to run the world on..

I think you're overestimating the general populace if you assume they're above "whole number bias".
Although, you could mask the decimal in the transaction software by simply calling 0.00000001 BTC as a whole unit of something else (like the satoshi or whatever), where you will eventually run into the issue of the lowest possible transaction, the way the dollar currency is limited to a minimum 1 cent transaction.


Let me try and work this muddle of zeros out into words.

21,000,000.00000000 can be divided into 2,100,000,000,000,000 whole units. That's 2.1 quadrillion, or 2100 trillion, or 2.1 million billion. In which case you're probably right, that seems enough to run the world on.

Even if you account for the lowest possible transaction being 1 cent instead of 1 Dollar, you now have 21 trillion individual units, each divisible into "cents".

If anything this "software mask" would paint Litecoin into a rather useless corner. And if Bitcoin institutions allow for instant transactions, the 2.5 minute blocks will do nothing better, except bloat the block chain history.

Puzzling 

Is 2100 trillion really enough? If the GDP of the US was 15 Trillion dollars last year, and each of those dollars is divisible by 100 cents, that's a lot of 'units' (more zero's then I care to write).

Wikipedia says the total money supply in circulation of the world was 4 trillion in 2008 which had doubled from 2 trillion only 6 years prior (and had doubled from only 1 trillion 12 years before that). They don't mention the current estimated money in circulation, one could perhaps guess that it's up to 8 trillion depending on how the recession has panned out.

Maybe our incredibly large number won't stay so incredibly large for as long as we might think.

You cannot inflate btc like you can with money those dollars are fake made up from thin air ie. they just turned the printing presses on nothing backs them. Now you can say nothing backs btc either but one thing you can be certain of is no more than 21M of them will be produced no printing press to turn on here to get more.

[Fuzzy]

[...]
Is 2100 trillion really enough? If the GDP of the US was 15 Trillion dollars last year, and each of those dollars is divisible by 100 cents, that's a lot of 'units' (more zero's then I care to write).

Wikipedia says the total money supply in circulation of the world was 4 trillion in 2008 which had doubled from 2 trillion only 6 years prior (and had doubled from only 1 trillion 12 years before that). They don't mention the current estimated money in circulation, one could perhaps guess that it's up to 8 trillion depending on how the recession has panned out.

Maybe our incredibly large number won't stay so incredibly large for as long as we might think.

You cannot inflate btc like you can with money those dollars are fake made up from thin air ie. they just turned the printing presses on nothing backs them. Now you can say nothing backs btc either but one thing you can be certain of is no more than 21M of them will be produced no printing press to turn on here to get more.

I think it will be enough for the next few decades. By then there will be all sorts of new crypto currencies, so who knows if Bitcoin will still be the primary digital currency for daily exchanges.

Also, I'd keep in mind that by then, a large portion of BTC will have been lost, so 2100 trillion will never really be in circulation.

Assuming no one ever breaks the encryption. It was said that everyone alive today will be dead by the time that happens 

[Fuzzy]

Coincidence?

[DILLIGAF]

By then there will be all sorts of new crypto currencies, so who knows if Bitcoin will still be the primary digital currency for daily exchanges.

Most likely if history is any indication it usually is never the first mover to the market that maintains the dominant position unless backed by government methods of intervention like patents, mandating their use, that type of thing so as you say who knows.

[Fuzzy]

By then there will be all sorts of new crypto currencies, so who knows if Bitcoin will still be the primary digital currency for daily exchanges.

Most likely if history is any indication it usually is never the first mover to the market that maintains the dominant position unless backed by government methods of intervention like patents, mandating their use, that type of thing so as you say who knows.

Well, if history is any REAL indication, most people are idiots mindless sheep, and once this crypto-currency thing takes off, the Government along with the lending institutions (banks and credit card companies) will release their own digital currency, and the un-informed masses will flock to it like moths to a flame.
Meanwhile, a strong corporate funded campaign will be launched to smear crypto-currency as a tool for terrorists ,drug dealers and child pornographers.
Again, the brain washed masses will pat themselves on the back for calling you in, and the scum continue to rule our lives.

Man, talk about jaded.

[kano]

Um ... you didn't know about this?
http://news.yahoo.com/sweden-cash-king-no-more-082544562.html

[DILLIGAF]

By then there will be all sorts of new crypto currencies, so who knows if Bitcoin will still be the primary digital currency for daily exchanges.

Most likely if history is any indication it usually is never the first mover to the market that maintains the dominant position unless backed by government methods of intervention like patents, mandating their use, that type of thing so as you say who knows.

Well, if history is any REAL indication, most people are idiots mindless sheep, and once this crypto-currency thing takes off, the Government along with the lending institutions (banks and credit card companies) will release their own digital currency, and the un-informed masses will flock to it like moths to a flame.
Meanwhile, a strong corporate funded campaign will be launched to smear crypto-currency as a tool for terrorists ,drug dealers and child pornographers.
Again, the brain washed masses will pat themselves on the back for calling you in, and the scum continue to rule our lives.

Man, talk about jaded.

True enough you left out not just the implication of criminal activity but the inevitable ban on btc that would come to make it a criminal activity brought to you by the same actors you list here.

Edit: And now I think of it in addition to kano's link the Royal Canadian Mint is going with their own digital currency as well already so the competition is coming.

[kano]

...
Edit: And now I think of it in addition to kano's link the Royal Canadian Mint is going with their own digital currency as well already so the competition is coming.

Yes if you read up about that one, they are also offering $50K in gold to the best payment solutions with their MintChip
http://mintchipchallenge.com/

[Gabi]

Nothing is ASIC hostile. Nothing.
Go read again the definition of ASIC please 

It is my understanding that, in terms of cost-effectiveness, scrypt can be regarded as relatively ASIC-hostile.
Of course you could design a fast (relative to a desktop CPU/GPU) ASIC for scrypt, but because of the memory requirements of scrypt wouldn't it turn out to be way more expensive than a fast ASIC for, say, SHA-256?

No. There is no "ASIC hostile" things  It would be like saying "scrypt is computer hostile"...
Why it should be more expensive?