Fair share of coins

[unent]

I doubt many early adopters are still holding their coins.

many early adopters (especially those who mined) do still hold, those in it to make bitcoin a true currency, kinda defeats the whole purpose if you trade it for fiat (but thats lost on most people here nowadays).

i've been in cryptos awhile and i personally don't trade for fiat (what seems crazy in short term pays off in the long as its more crazy to trade a deflationary currency for an inflationary one).

those who weren't in it for the fiat are the ones who (on paper) are now worth more then those who where

Do you hold large amounts of bitcoins you mined in the early days?

nope, anytime I've got decent amounts of btc I trade them for ltc and other alts, but ltc is my biggest holdings (basically the choice between being a moderate holder of btc or one of the largest ltc and other alts holder). I've never been a huge miner most my holding come from trading.

I read a thread from about a year ago where a guy predicted litecoin would shoot up in value and be a better investment than bitcoin.

I'm pleased to hear from someone else who did well from litecoin investing.

It gives me hope for the future.

[1715075601]

1715075601

[1715075601]

1715075601

[1715075601]

1715075601

[markm]

The biggest problem with litecoin and DOGE seems to be the mentality of scrypt miners in general; they seem to be determined to run "bait and switch" scams whereby they pretend to support one coin, momentarily making it look like maybe that coin might have some hope of eventually securing its blockchain, then abandon it for another, in a long stream of serial bait and switch scams.

If either litecoin or DOGE does actually have dedication to securing its blockchain, as in miners who are going to stick to it regardless of any momentary profit that they might for a moment make by abandoning it for some new bait-and-switch scam, then maybe one of them might have a chance; or of they adapt so that both litecoin and DOGE can be merged mined together, so that both can reach decent hashpower levels together instead of each in effect undermining the security of the other.

-MarkM-

[unent]

What happens when doge is almost completely mined?

Do you think the small amount of mineable coins they will allow for inflation each year will attract enough miners to secure the blockchain?

[berone]

there are several coin those share distribution is fair, like faircoin. it seems faircoin has met some problems. but it is a nice coin.

[markm]

Two of the fairest coins are CoiLedCoin and GeistGeld, because anyone, even with jsut a GPU or a block eruptor, has had years to mine them, even to mine both at once while also mining bitcoins, using merged mining.

Even right now they are still easy to mine though that might not last much longer as people become more aware how insanely vulnerable non-merged-mined coins are thus drawing more attention to the benefits of merged mined coins.

-MarkM-

[kelsey]

The biggest problem with litecoin and DOGE seems to be the mentality of scrypt miners in general; they seem to be determined to run "bait and switch" scams whereby they pretend to support one coin, momentarily making it look like maybe that coin might have some hope of eventually securing its blockchain, then abandon it for another, in a long stream of serial bait and switch scams.

If either litecoin or DOGE does actually have dedication to securing its blockchain, as in miners who are going to stick to it regardless of any momentary profit that they might for a moment make by abandoning it for some new bait-and-switch scam, then maybe one of them might have a chance; or of they adapt so that both litecoin and DOGE can be merged mined together, so that both can reach decent hashpower levels together instead of each in effect undermining the security of the other.

-MarkM-

or maybe the solution is to come up with an alternative to POW to secure a blockchain.

[Bit_Happy]

Cryptogenic Bullion claims to be a..
"Proof of Work/Proof of Stake Hybrid"
http://gotcrypto.net/about-cgb/
...which has never successfully been attacked.

Is that true?

...
or maybe the solution is to come up with an alternative to POW to secure a blockchain.

[lynn_402]

You need to make a cryptocoin with fair share of coins. Everyone who downloads and uses the wallet for the first time will be awarded with 1 coin. The number of total coins will be determined by the number of wallets.

Wouldn't everyone just keep their one coin and hold them hoping the value will explode, and no one will buy it because its free so it never will?

[lynn_402]

I'd like to add that, since a lot more people are aware of cryptos now, any new coin (including those created a few months ago, like Doge) will be, by default, distributed more evenly to a bigger number of persons. Not that I have anything against early adopters of Bitcoin - they deserve it for putting trust in something so risky, and we would not be here today were it not for them.

[markm]

The biggest problem with litecoin and DOGE seems to be the mentality of scrypt miners in general; they seem to be determined to run "bait and switch" scams whereby they pretend to support one coin, momentarily making it look like maybe that coin might have some hope of eventually securing its blockchain, then abandon it for another, in a long stream of serial bait and switch scams.

If either litecoin or DOGE does actually have dedication to securing its blockchain, as in miners who are going to stick to it regardless of any momentary profit that they might for a moment make by abandoning it for some new bait-and-switch scam, then maybe one of them might have a chance; or of they adapt so that both litecoin and DOGE can be merged mined together, so that both can reach decent hashpower levels together instead of each in effect undermining the security of the other.

-MarkM-

or maybe the solution is to come up with an alternative to POW to secure a blockchain.

But not one that the same people can do that same thing to. Design an ASIC for a new proof of work, get it into mass market stores ready to open sales of it the same moment you release the genesis block or the decrypt key for the client.

Any proof of work that caters to CPU, GPU or FPGA is basically the same deal, the botnets, GPU farms and FPGA farms just run different code is all.

-MarkM-

[kelsey]

The biggest problem with litecoin and DOGE seems to be the mentality of scrypt miners in general; they seem to be determined to run "bait and switch" scams whereby they pretend to support one coin, momentarily making it look like maybe that coin might have some hope of eventually securing its blockchain, then abandon it for another, in a long stream of serial bait and switch scams.

If either litecoin or DOGE does actually have dedication to securing its blockchain, as in miners who are going to stick to it regardless of any momentary profit that they might for a moment make by abandoning it for some new bait-and-switch scam, then maybe one of them might have a chance; or of they adapt so that both litecoin and DOGE can be merged mined together, so that both can reach decent hashpower levels together instead of each in effect undermining the security of the other.

-MarkM-

or maybe the solution is to come up with an alternative to POW to secure a blockchain.

But not one that the same people can do that same thing to. Design an ASIC for a new proof of work, get it into mass market stores ready to open sales of it the same moment you release the genesis block or the decrypt key for the client.

Any proof of work that caters to CPU, GPU or FPGA is basically the same deal, the botnets, GPU farms and FPGA farms just run different code is all.

-MarkM-

don't disagree, however have you looked at it from the point of view, anytime when cryptos can be bought with fiat and miners sell as soon as they mine, then it matters not in the grand scheme of things who mines.

[markm]

don't disagree, however have you looked at it from the point of view, anytime when cryptos can be bought with fiat and miners sell as soon as they mine, then it matters not in the grand scheme of things who mines.

If that were so it would not matter that the bitcoin miners are the coin miners in general, that each and every coin that comes along it is the same miners mining them all.

Thus it would not matter that all the miners all use ASICs, nor would it matter than kids with GPUs in their mom's basements cannot compete at mining.

Kids with GPUs though seem to think it does matter, hmm I wonder why and whether they are, in the grand scheme of things, correct?

-MarkM-

[nagatlakshmi]

When you are going to release this coin?

Are you going to release the coin? 

Yes, I am. 

[department]

You need to make a cryptocoin with fair share of coins. Everyone who downloads and uses the wallet for the first time will be awarded with 1 coin. The number of total coins will be determined by the number of wallets.

You should be awarded, this is how a currency should work. Bitcoin wasnt genius because it made early adopters the only significant ones hoarding thousands of coins. This makes it all look like a big ponzi. The whole crypto has become a stock market now. People doing trading all day long.

Bitcoin has failed

Bitcoin has not failed. It is basically the biggest computational experiment to ever exist. It's still in alpha/beta and still very young, all cryptos are.

But I feel like going in the wrong direction, not failure itself.

[zhuaihdd]

I have to admire the unflappable nature of anyone holding any kind of crypto coin but those who are holding the alt-coins are truly the nerviest of the lot. Every trend line seems to indicate a 'one winner' scenario and that means most coins will have a zero value conclusion. What are the arguments to support the survival of the alt-coins?

I think the only reason for existence is to have good prospects of gain, when he unprofitable, will be abandoned.

[markm]

No need to register. We can use only wallet addresses and IPs.

i can have as many adresses and ip's as i like (not only me - everybody can). There is your problem. Really fair distribution with nobody cheating is really not that easy i think.

We can use UUIDs from BIOS.

How do you tell a faked UUID from a UUID that actaully corresponds to an existing BIOS chip?

Does the BIOS UUID change when people "flash" their BIOS? If so, where does the new value used as UUID in that case come from and what stops people from "flashing" over and over again to get more and more new UUIDs?

How do you prevent the one coin that a UUID will get from being worth more than two BIOS chips? As if you do not, people can just keep buying more such chips...

-MarkM-

[emelac]

I'm no expert and I might be wrong but I seem to remember you could not flash a pentium chip to get a new UUID, but you could do it with an AMD chip. However, there is guaranteed to be an expert on here who will know for sure.

[softron]

Nice idea for a coin  but what if some creates 1million wallets

[Bitcoin Magazine]

You need to make a cryptocoin with fair share of coins. Everyone who downloads and uses the wallet for the first time will be awarded with 1 coin. The number of total coins will be determined by the number of wallets.

Satoshi coin will NOT be free.  but it is selling for 1 satoshi per coin tonight, and tonight *ONLY* unless i can get the bidding up to 15BTC for the whole lot   

[CoinDiver]

Nice idea for a coin  but what if some creates 1million wallets

You would need creating a wallet to take some amount of work. Like solving a math problem. And then people could use that solution to the math problem as proof of their work. Yeah, yeah, genius. 

Quit crying about things not being fair and get a job. And no, voting for other people's money doesn't count as a job.