BITCOIN VS ETHEREUM

[E.exchanger]

So i have been reading about it since last few days and want to know what community is thinking about ethereum.

Will it overcome bitcoin completely

Will bitcoin fall when ethereum come into the picture completely

Is it a threat for our community???

Everyone can discuss their views on it  here !!!

[shtako]

Its just a fancy scam.

[greentea]

ethereum's whole IPO and premine was a huge turnoff ...

[Warning__3]

Does Etherium still exist? is anyone actually using it for something?

[JoeyD]

The well funded (by unknown party) Ethereum team wants to be the Microsoft or Apple appstore walled garden of cryptocurrencies and considers everything outside their own influence a disease (according to interviews with Charles Hoskinson) or paint them as inferior, instead of showing a superior concept that proves itself on it's own merits.

I can come up with some other one-liners to counter the hype:

Bitcoin allows you to use any turing complete programming language you want cooperating on a carefully scrutinized and well defined central information layer.
E. is trying to force everyone onto a single costly and very limited scripting language, with a monstrous non specialized blockchain. Satoshi suggested sharing the power of the bitcoin miners for other specialized use cases via merged mining on their very own specialized blockchains, and so contrary to the E-teams BS Satoshi most certainly was not pro centralization, nor was he advocating single central blockchains.
E. is limitless transaction maleability ( turing complete scripting). Contrary to what car salesman mister Charles H. wants you to believe, limiting the scripting options in Bitcoin was and still is a very deliberate decision for security (anti malware, think excel-macros) and not some bogus like it being to difficult or to experimental.
E. is a pay per move etch-a-sketch, yeah you can technically draw anything you want, but you're not going to make any dazzling artwork. Anything remotely successful on the limited ethereum blockchain has to move to a specialized custom built blockchain as fast as possible before someone else does it and creates a proper efficient version.
E. is rumored to be busy creating hardware licenses, which means they want to be the next patent troll.
E. wants to revert to centralization and monopolization instead of decentralization and evolution. So instead of bitcoin2.0 it's going in reverse bitcoin-(minus)0.1
E. wants to cater to its own exclusive group of privileged investors and friends and to leach of other peoples efforts. Or in their own words, remember Ethereum has no features. Or to put it simply, if you can't see the product being sold, then you are the product.

In short, be very careful with who you trust, don't just go and buy everything a smooth salesman is trying to sell you.

EDIT
Edited for clarity and fixing of errors

[riekinho]

The well funded (by unknown party) Ethereum team wants to be the Microsoft or Apple appstore walled garden of cryptocurrencies and considers everything outside their own influence a disease (according to interviews with Charles Hoskinson) or paint them as inferior, instead of showing a superior concept that proves itself on it's own merits.

I can come up with some other one-liners to counter the hype:

Bitcoin allows you to use any turing complete programming language you want cooperating on a carefully scrutinized and defined central information layer.
E. is trying to force everyone onto a single costly and very limited scripting language, with a monstrous non specialized blockchain. Satoshi suggested sharing the power the bitcoin miners for other specialized use cases via merged mining on their very own specialized blockchains, and so contrary to the E-teams BS Satoshi was not pro centralization or single blockchains.
E. is limitless transaction maleability ( turing complete scripting). Contrary to what car salesman mister Charles H. wants you to believe, limiting the scripting options in Bitcoin was and still is a very deliberate decision for security (anti malware, think excel-macros) and not some bogus like it being to difficult or to experimental.
E. is a pay per move etch-a-sketch, yeah you can technically draw anything you want, but you're not going to make any dazzling artwork. Anything remotely successful on the limited ethereum blockchain has to move to a specialized custom built blockchain as fast as possible before someone else does it and creates a proper efficient version.
E. is rumored to be busy creating hardware licenses, which means they want to be the next patent troll.
E. wants to revert to centralization and monopolization instead of decentralization and evolution. So instead of bitcoin2.0 it's going in reverse bitcoin-(minus)0.1
E. wants to cater to its own exclusive group of privileged investors and friends and to leach of other peoples efforts. Or in their own words, remember Ethereum has no features.

In short, be very careful with who you trust, don't just go and buy everything a smooth salesman is trying to sell you.

Thanks for that. I had hunches about some of the points you brought up but you worded it so well.

[atleticofa]

Its just a fancy scam.

Hahaha. I will come back to this thread in some years and I will laugh again,.

[melvster]

So i have been reading about it since last few days and want to know what community is thinking about ethereum.

Will it overcome bitcoin completely

Will bitcoin fall when ethereum come into the picture completely

Is it a threat for our community???

Everyone can discuss their views on it  here !!!

Seems like a reasonable project with some decent devs.

I doubt it will overcome btc, but may compliment it, time will tell.

I'm already using a turing complete language with bitcoin, it's called javascript

[shtako]

Its just a fancy scam.

Hahaha. I will come back to this thread in some years and I will laugh again,.

Not if you jump of a bridge because you lost a lot of money investing in this scam. Time will tell. 

[jmlubin]

> The well funded (by unknown party) Ethereum team

Ethereum is not yet well-funded, but we hope to be to enable us to execute our vision. 

We have been self-funding using our own personal savings.  There is no external funding.  This takes the form of sharing living space in dorm-like conditions for some, buying our own plane tickets, conference attendances,  ….   Many of us are working full time on Ethereum, having left other jobs or projects.  Many, many others are part-time volunteers.


> wants to be the Microsoft or Apple appstore walled garden of cryptocurrencies and

Ehtereum strives to produce the opposite of the centralized, walled garden effect.  We will offer a distributed, OPEN app catalog for ease of use.  This catalog will enable consumers of services to find services more easily.  Ethereum will not charge anyone for the use of this catalog, neither service providers nor service consumers.

As early as possible, we intend to begin the process of morphing into a distributed, autonomous organization (DAO).  (h/t to Stan for naming the concept of DAC)


> considers everything outside their own influence a disease (according to interviews with Charles Hoskinson) or paint them as inferior, instead of showing a superior concept that proves itself on it's own merits.

Ethereum considers many efforts in the Bitcoin space and cryptocurrency 2.0 space to have great merits and we are working actively with some groups (Open Transactions, Mastercoin, Colored coins, Sergio Lerner of qixcoin has also helped with commentary, …) and hope to work with others.  Ethereum is in the process of defining its core principles but openness, transparency and inclusiveness will central be among them.


> I can come up with some other one-liners to counter the hype:

Is it productive to spend your time creating evil sounding fictions about a project that you don’t have much detailed knowledge of?


> Bitcoin allows you to use any turing complete programming language you want cooperating on a carefully scrutinized and well defined central information layer.

Everyone in the Ethereum project loves Biticoin and we expect it to remain a backbone system for value transfer for a very long time. 

The Bitcoin system does a small number of things and does them well.  The protocol serves as a secure, limited (scripting language is not Turing-complete), rock solid, backbone network for monetary transactions.  When the BTC monetary base gets much larger, volatility should decrease and it will serve as a more stable store of value and numeraire. For such a network, it is likely best to keep the applications (scripting) layer simple, narrowly focussed, and secure as possible. 

Alongside the Bitcoin currency backbone will sit Ethereum.  Ethereum is a different sort of endeavor with different goals, constraints and demands.  Whereas Bitcoin should maintain a slow-moving, conservative development arc, Ethereum, as a distributed, consensus-based application platform cannot afford to do so.  The software services space moves very quickly and Ethereum must be designed to continually benefit from improvements and innovations.

It is no secret that the Bitcoin protocol has some issues/weaknesses.  Ethereum, while targeted at solving different problems, will attempt to address as many of these weaknesses as possible.  Some weaknesses will be research problems for some time.  Ethereum intends to fund such research for the benefit of all projects in the crypto community if possible.


> E. is trying to force everyone onto a single costly and very limited scripting language, with

Very strange, unsubstantiable statement about a system that is not yet fully designed and developed.  It is neither costly nor very limited.


> a monstrous non specialized blockchain. Satoshi suggested sharing the power of the bitcoin miners for other specialized use cases via merged mining on their very own specialized blockchains, and so contrary to the E-teams BS Satoshi most certainly was not pro centralization, nor was he advocating single central blockchains.

There is value in sharing the security of a single, large blockchain among many different projects.  It is difficult to create a wholly new blockchain (define or clone the protocol, attract and incentivize miners, keep miners interested when the next new thing comes a long, …) for every new application.  Any comers can use the Ethereum blockchain and get all of its security for free.  There will be computation fees paid for executing code, but these fees will go to the miners for providing the resources to the network.


> E. is limitless transaction maleability ( turing complete scripting).

Transactions won’t be malleable, programs will.  We’re taking a cue from von Neumann on this.


> Contrary to what car salesman mister Charles H. wants you to believe, limiting the scripting options in Bitcoin was and still is a very deliberate decision for security (anti malware, think excel-macros) and not some bogus like it being to difficult or to experimental.

Ad hominem attacks in such a young and almost completely cooperative niche are counterproductive.  There are exceeding few people in this niche who would resort to such tactics.


> E. is a pay per move etch-a-sketch, yeah you can technically draw anything you want, but you're not going to make any dazzling artwork. Anything remotely successful on the limited ethereum blockchain has to move to a specialized custom built blockchain as fast as possible before someone else does it and creates a proper efficient version.

That is a slightly different model and we’ve seen it proposed and executed before.  We wish you success in the implementation of it.  This space will grow exponentially for a long time and we will all likely thrive.  Your success will be a boon to us and our’s to yours. 


> E. is rumored to be busy creating hardware licenses, which means they want to be the next patent troll.

Nope.  Wow. 


> E. wants to revert to centralization and monopolization instead of decentralization and evolution. So instead of bitcoin2.0 it's going in reverse bitcoin-(minus)0.1

Wow.  Some of your points above had at least a specter that you could distort and magnify to manufacture your attack.


> E. wants to cater to its own exclusive group of privileged investors and friends and to leach of other peoples efforts. Or in their own words, remember Ethereum has no features. Or to put it simply, if you can't see the product being sold, then you are the product.

We are working to make the pre-sale of ether as open and fair as possible.  Nobody will be excluded.  Terms will be identical for all.


> In short, be very careful with who you trust, don't just go and buy everything a smooth salesman is trying to sell you.

Indeed.


It sounds like the post was written by someone who is scared of something, and possibly has an agenda which she/he considers to be under threat by a project which is not yet even released.  You have likely built some great technology, so wouldn’t it be more productive to spend your time continuing to develop it.  Many, many volunteers contributors on Ethereum are doing just that all day, every day.

[sadface]

its got a terrible name. thats what popped into my mind when i first heard about it.

[Bowdlerize]

It has more potential than the altcoins I normally mine so my rig will spend a month or two on it.

[salsacz]

if you compare Bitcoin vs. Ethereum, Nxt is a winner, read: http://justpaste.it/nxt-decentralized-internet

or: http://justpaste.it/nxt-introduction-4-journalists

[btcfre@k]

nxt was supposed to overcome bitcoin...and look what it is now..

[ShroomsKit_Disgrace]

nxt was supposed to overcome bitcoin...and look what it is now..

Tell me, what is it now? I see it with a really bright future, don´t you?

[salsacz]

nxt was supposed to overcome bitcoin...and look what it is now..

fantastic! look: http://nxtra.org/nxt-client/  (type: "1" as a password)

[greentea]

their initial 50% premine AND IPO was a huge turnoff when they first announced here ...

dont understand their pay to play model, they want the community to build the contracts but you have to pay to use their blockchain? ...

they have dozens and dozens of partners and founders and staff, and everyone knows no one works for free that's what the massive IPO and premine are for.  

I guess if you like hail marys you could invest, buy it'd be best to wait to see how it pans out and just mine it.

[JoeyD]

It sounds like the post was written by someone who is scared of something, and possibly has an agenda which she/he considers to be under threat by a project which is not yet even released.  You have likely built some great technology, so wouldn’t it be more productive to spend your time continuing to develop it.  Many, many volunteers contributors on Ethereum are doing just that all day, every day.

I don't have an agenda, other than that I have been repeatedly burned and scammed by team-members with initially well hidden egocentric motivations, which has led to the destruction of many similar idealistic projects as some of the ones in this space and which have resulted in me being somewhat more distrustful. You might consider that as not constructive, but I urge you to not rely on 100% trust in people even if you do sleep together, because that has proven to be destructive 10 times out of 10 in my experience.

Reading my post back I can see how it could be observed as such and maybe I should have chosen a more careful way of wording it. I also admit that I posted that around 3 o'clock in the morning in a foul mood and English is not my native language, so in my attempt to make my points as clear as possible I was not as circumventive as usual in English. Still I don't think my points are that disturbing or unmentionable, but that could be a cultural/lingual difference.

What I was trying to do was to point out that there are some things people should consider and be sure of, before putting their money on the line. In my defense most of the points I mentioned where things said or posted by members of the Ethereum team (and that includes the statement about hardware), although I did put a little twist on some of them. I don't really think calling Charles Hoskinson similar to a car-salesman is an ad-hominem, unless you're trying to say he isn't trying to sell Ethereum and being somewhat liberal in how he does that. The rest of that sentence is also true and I've heard him say those things more than once. I'm not alone in being ticked off by rhetoric tricks like putting words in Satoshis mouth which go against the actual things Satoshi said and that has been pointed out by people other than me multiple times, without much effect. I'll give you that he does not represent the entire Ethereum team, but he did make those statements as well as a number of the things I listed in my post as the representative of the Ethereum-team. I'm glad you came here to put my mind at ease and defuse/refute some of the statements that Charles made, but you cannot blame me for taking the words of your spokesperson as being representative of the ambitions of the team as a whole.

And before anyone asks. I've tried discussing these points repeatedly on various public channels with the Ethereum team and proponents on open channels, but since these remarks were either ignored or avoided, it did not leave me much else to go on. Before I came to these points I also discussed them with various other persons in the hope that I was wrong, from what I'm told and have seen they also tried discussing them with the Ethereum team with similar results, some of them mentioning having been banned from some of those channels, which I'm unable to confirm.

So while I might have stated things a bit strongly (hardly as strong as we normally do in my country) I did not come up with them on my own and since they were the complete opposite of how I thought about your project at the start, I did try to get them defused by your team long before posting them here. I still stand by my position that people should be convinced by the project itself on it's own merits and not trust in hype or a single person or promises of how things will be in the future. Also if your project is as you describe it is, a nobody like me should not be able to affect it in any way.

[jmlubin]

> I don't have an agenda
> I urge you to not rely on 100% trust in people

Based on this response, it appears that your agenda is in sync with ours: to see to the development of next generation consensus-based applications platforms that enable distributed services.  And to build trustless systems that are impervious to corruption, co-option, censorship or other centralized manipulations, and which serve to raise the standards of living of people in developed and less developed regions of the world.  In short, to do work that we are proud of in every aspect.


> What I was trying to do was to point out that there are some things people should consider and be sure of, before putting their money on the line.

If you have faith in the full vision when it is published, or the people behind it, it makes sense to get involved early and buy some ether or contribute in some other way.   For others, it makes sense to watch from a distance and see what emerges.  There will be plenty of time to get involved if you like what you see.


> I'm not alone in being ticked off by rhetoric tricks like putting words in Satoshis mouth which go against the actual things Satoshi said and that has been pointed out by people other than me multiple times, without much effect. I'll give you that he does not represent the entire Ethereum team, but he did make those statements as well as a number of the things I listed in my post as the representative of the Ethereum-team.

While we aren’t always in sync in our communications, I think it is fair to say that Charles does speak for us in nearly all of his communications, just as I or any of the founders do.  We will make mistakes sometimes.  But these will be quickly noticed, discussed and corrected.  I am not aware of any substantive thing that Charles has communicated about Ethereum that I disagree with.  (And, btw, Charles has read nearly everything that Satoshi is known to have written.)

If you are hinting that Satoshi never said that he didn’t want to complicate his experiment with the addition of a Turing-complete engine, you may be correct.  But I think it is reasonable to imply this.

Also, please note that there were things we said in the past that are no longer part of the plans.  In particular, numbers released early regarding pre-mines and monetary inflation rates are now out of date.  We believe a pre-mine to endow the development of the project and to compensate early volunteer contributors makes more sense than issuing all of the ether through miners and generating a lot of waste heat in their parent’s basements.  Bitcoin worked well this way (but still effectively had an enormous “pre-mine” before people became aware of it), but Ethereum has to hit the ground running and can only develop a deep, useful ecosystem with resources sufficient to feed and house the talented people that are drawn to the project.  It can be argued that Bitcoin development currently suffers from not having an endowment or a large cadre of active developers.


> I'm glad you came here to put my mind at ease and defuse/refute some of the statements that Charles made, but you cannot blame me for taking the words of your spokesperson as being representative of the ambitions of the team as a whole.

I don’t blame you for that.  That is exactly what you should do.  And I am glad that you responded to clarify some of your positions. 


> And before anyone asks. I've tried discussing these points repeatedly on various public channels with the Ethereum team and proponents on open channels, but since these remarks were either ignored or avoided, it did not leave me much else to go on. Before I came to these points I also discussed them with various other persons in the hope that I was wrong, from what I'm told and have seen they also tried discussing them with the Ethereum team with similar results, some of them mentioning having been banned from some of those channels, which I'm unable to confirm.

I am sorry to hear that you have had some frustration in communicating with us.  It is a big project, with limited personnel and we are all busy all the time, so sometimes we can’t scan all forums to try to address issues which are expressed.

Feel free to contact me anytime with your thoughts or concerns: my email is joseph at the main ethereum domain.

We are an open project, so we would be happy to have you contribute in any way you see fit.


> So while I might have stated things a bit strongly (hardly as strong as we normally do in my country) I did not come up with them on my own and since they were the complete opposite of how I thought about your project at the start, I did try to get them defused by your team long before posting them here. I still stand by my position that people should be convinced by the project itself on it's own merits and not trust in hype or a single person or promises of how things will be in the future. Also if your project is as you describe it is, a nobody like me should not be able to affect it in any way.

Agreed.  A pessimist is a disappointed optimist.  I hope and expect that your original excitement will return as the details of the projects are finalized and released for evaluation by the community.

[greenclover]

Bitcoin rules, Ethereum?? what is it? a junk coin