Which altcoin will succeed ?

[BitcoinPorn]

And the rate seems to be growing.  2 months from now, after 6 more alt-chains have been released... will anyone even remember the previous ones?

I will say it's going to suck that I think there are people really invested in alternative coins, but no one will stop and think of the overall picture and how none of them will succeed if they don't at least one slip past and become that penny to the Bitcoin nickel.     

So far NameCoin is the most impressive in the sense that it is like an energizer bunny.  No one makes claims about how it is technologically better than any other coin, but maybe just for the fact it didn't have to deal with the people in this subforum that it 'made it' lol

[norulezapply]

Okay, come on now. Who voted for solidcoin 8 times?

[Explodicle]

Okay, come on now. Who voted for solidcoin 8 times?

Fun fact: the SolidCoin 2 client votes online for you! Check the source!

[grod]

11 votes for solidcoin.  So that's the 9 pig nodes, and two from CoinHunter/RealSolid then?

But seriously, just look at who people are voting for with their hashing power.  At the moment it's SC out in front with possibly bogus reporting having 20x the cpu power devoted to litecoin and tbx combined.  I take that ~40,000 CPUs still mining SC estimate with a giant mountain of salt.  Litecoin is in the lead with about the same network security as tbx had after a week (we're soon to be 2 days old!), with hashing power growing at a slow but steady rate.  TBX is 30% behind since its hashing power was cut in half (curiously, it didn't drop very much on SC release) and still falling.

[Bobnova]

The reported hashing power only matters if the same algorithm is being used.  Clearly SC2 either doesn't use the same one, or (more likely) has creative reporting of the hash power.

I tested SC2 and Art's CPUminer against each other at the same clock speed:
CPUMiner Scrypt:  16-17kh/s
SC2: 45-48kh/s

So divide the reported SC2 hash by three to get something comparable to the various scrypt coins.
That still leaves rather more power there then elsewhere, maybe CH/RS rented a botnet for a while so he didn't have to pump'n'dump SC2 like he did SC1?

[grod]

The reported hashing power only matters if the same algorithm is being used.  Clearly SC2 either doesn't use the same one, or (more likely) has creative reporting of the hash power.

I tested SC2 and Art's CPUminer against each other at the same clock speed:
CPUMiner Scrypt:  16-17kh/s
SC2: 45-48kh/s

So divide the reported SC2 hash by three to get something comparable to the various scrypt coins.
That still leaves rather more power there then elsewhere, maybe CH/RS rented a botnet for a while so he didn't have to pump'n'dump SC2 like he did SC1?

I wonder if hash rate estimates are adjusted for every even block being difficulty 1, or if it simply the same networkhashps getinfo calculation (which assumes constant difficulty blocks) as the client it's derived from?  If the later then the actual mining power can be divided by 2 again.  Still, that would still yield double the power of litecoin and tbx combined.  I'm still not buying it.

It would be cheaper to simply dump money and paint the charts on btce than rent even a small botnet for days, IMO.

[DeathAndTaxes]

difficulty doesn't alter hashrates.  It simply means you need more hashes per coin/block.

It would be nice if all chains site had some "normalized" hashing power metric.

For CPU based chains taking hashrate and dividing by aproximate hashrate per GHz you could get estimate GHz of network which would allow them all to be comparable.  Granted you could never be exact but it should get you in the ballpark. 

[mymenace]

bump

we now know the answer

[Balthazar]

Vote for the SolidCoin 2.0  Choose your future 

[ballot]

which one did 

[knightcoin]

if is just a Clone coin ... better is thinking about a cool service attached to your coin, a specific niche market and a nice community