Litecoin Creator (Charlie Lee) Recommends Merged Mining with Dogecoin

[peterlustig]

This would only apply if there were a real market for those coins, but there is none.
Look at what happened to DOGE since the first halving.
Did it double in price?
No, it did the opposite. Why? Because there is no market, no real demand, pure PONZI.

The only chance I see for Litecoin is to make some good distance to the competitiors by innovation.
Not by flawed assumptions whose only goal is to scam more investors out of their money.

People told the same about Quarkcoin, the first block reward halvings came and the coin lost a lot of value. Then it halved to 32QRK and bam, 50000% rise in 3 days or so.

I think all this talk about algo and spec changes is nonsense and hurts the stability of the coins in question. Merged mining may be useful, not 100% on that yet.

[flipme]

This would only apply if there were a real market for those coins, but there is none.
Look at what happened to DOGE since the first halving.
Did it double in price?
No, it did the opposite. Why? Because there is no market, no real demand, pure PONZI.

The only chance I see for Litecoin is to make some good distance to the competitiors by innovation.
Not by flawed assumptions whose only goal is to scam more investors out of their money.

People told the same about Quarkcoin, the first block reward halvings came and the coin lost a lot of value. Then it halved to 32QRK and bam, 50000% rise in 3 days or so.

I think all this talk about algo and spec changes is nonsense and hurts the stability of the coins in question. Merged mining may be useful, not 100% on that yet.

This is how size works, nice for the Quark crowd. They made a killing.
And it kind of proofs my point, that it is very important to have an innovative underlying concept.

There is big money sitting out there, waiting for good concepts to hit on.
As it seems, it's not gonna be PoW coins based on the Scrypt algo, secured by a network of custom gadgets, built by a handful of freaks.

[juve4v]

I can follow CL logic but that doesn't make Dogecoin better than it is: another shitcoin...

[Snail2]

You know that this is utter nonsense.
Any coin relying on network size for security reasons is a flawed concept in the first place.

Go ahead and merge, that'll be the end for both coins.
I wouldn't mind actually, all these crap Scrypt PoW coins getting out of the way.

You should instead think more about how you could make it a usable product for end customers.
Instead of trying to cheat more people out of their investments.
SCAM - SHITCOINS - your words - applies to LITE and DOGE more than ever in the meantime.

I agree with the usable product part, but coins really need multi peta hashrate for security and to ensure a steady flow of coins.
If you take a look at CPU coins you will see that most of them are vulnerable to botnets. GPU mined scrypt coins are vulnerable to big players... and both are vulnerable to new more profitable coins.

IMO only ASICs and merged mining can secure a blockchain. Not just because of the sheer power of the ASICs but also because of buying for example a scrypt ASIC means that you have long term plans with that particular algo, and you (and thousands of other miners) will not reconfigure your rigs tomorrow for let's say DRK and leaving your previous favorite (scrypt)coin with some tiny hashrate, thus making it a sitting duck.

[flipme]

You know that this is utter nonsense.
Any coin relying on network size for security reasons is a flawed concept in the first place.

Go ahead and merge, that'll be the end for both coins.
I wouldn't mind actually, all these crap Scrypt PoW coins getting out of the way.

You should instead think more about how you could make it a usable product for end customers.
Instead of trying to cheat more people out of their investments.
SCAM - SHITCOINS - your words - applies to LITE and DOGE more than ever in the meantime.

I agree with the usable product part, but coins really need multi peta hashrate for security and to ensure a steady flow of coins.
If you take a look at CPU coins you will see that most of them are vulnerable to botnets. GPU mined scrypt coins are vulnerable to big players... and both are vulnerable to new more profitable coins.

IMO only ASICs and merged mining can secure a blockchain. Not just because of the sheer power of the ASICs but also because of buying for example a scrypt ASIC means that you have long term plans with that particular algo, and you (and thousands of other miners) will not reconfigure your rigs tomorrow for let's say DRK and leaving your previous favorite (scrypt)coin with some tiny hashrate, thus making it a sitting duck.

The whole software issue is just a matter of deployment.
From the wallets to the miners. To make it consumer and industry usable at all.

And as I said, any coin whose security is dependent on the network size is a flawed concept from the beginning.
It's like putting the cart before the horse. PoW has to be secured by other means, and it is already.

I don't think the concept of pure Scrypt PoW coins, secured by the tiny ASIC LOBBY, have any viable future.
The big money will be thrown at other models.

[digitalindustry]

The reasoning is simple.

Dogecoin proved that a very destructive force could be created very rapidly via a meme.

If Dogecoin had wanted to, the nethash could have easily have ended Litecoin for all effective purposes.

The only real security in crypto is mult peta hash rate.

Something that will never be obtained with gpus.


~BCX~

There's that old "centralized is secure" meme that no one is buying anymore.

more power doesn't = more secure.

all it means is you are holding on to the fact that people will be politically ignorant enought to "believe" that the few people that end up owning all the ASICs are not either ;

1. Fiat Banking interests
or
2. Their many agents. (Some if which try to pass themselves off as "Government" agents)

Considering they have the biggest interest and the most directly effected, can you explain how you know that ;

1. They somehow missed that with thier expansive operational " intelligence" gathering operations or

2. Why or how they have figured that a digital " money" created not though debt or thier power is something they wouldn't be interested in.

I eagerly look forward to the explanation,   Because an adequate answer to  that would explain why ASICs are good because once you can explain how Fiat Debt money banks dont care about crypto then you can explain why there is no problem if # is increasingly concentrated in the smallest hands with the most, wait for it , Fiat debt money.

Considering

[digitalindustry]

Doge started as a circle jerk and now they have figuered out that the imminent loss of ASIC monopoly means the effective charitable funding of soon to be KnC ASIC owners, as there are no or little real investors.  And never were .

So what to do?

[digitalindustry]

Actually is El Dude about ?

This is certainly now my favorite topic on this forum maybe lock it ha ha so i can remake it?

[digitalindustry]

So let me just get my head around this ;


Litecoin

Merged with

Dogecoin

?

Dogelite?

: D

[peterlustig]

What people seem to forget: Maybe Dogecoin community doesn't want to merged mine together with LTC.

[Snail2]

The whole software issue is just a matter of deployment.
From the wallets to the miners. To make it consumer and industry usable at all.

And as I said, any coin whose security is dependent on the network size is a flawed concept from the beginning.
It's like putting the cart before the horse. PoW has to be secured by other means, and it is already.

I don't think the concept of pure Scrypt PoW coins, secured by the tiny ASIC LOBBY, have any viable future.
The big money will be thrown at other models.

What are those "other means"?

All coins are more or less dependent on the network. Even the POW-POS coins are.

[automobile]

So let me just get my head around this ;


Litecoin

Merged with

Dogecoin

?

Dogelite?

: D

Litedoge sounds cool 

[Spoetnik]

Litecoin is doomed to RIP anyway so ..

Thanks to coblee!  

So again, why is LTC doomed?

because of people that make stuff like (C.A.T.) Cryptsy Auto Trader lol
i see your Dogecoin program link in your sig then CAT listed for sale on that page with a Reddit page link lol

Selling a bot and supporting Doge coin and posting coin bullshit on Reddit = gay.

but you will of course come here and spout of about doing the right thing while no one is looking then do the opposite right ?
oooh those damn scam coins i hate them so much !!!!
pss, hey (whispers).. where is the Flappy coin or My Little Pony wallet download link
hahaha HypocriteTalk.org

[Pangia]

What people seem to forget: Maybe Dogecoin community doesn't want to merged mine together with LTC.

That's actually the overwhelming response so far from the /r/dogecoin community. They are viewing this as some kind of desperate attempt by Charlie Lee to help LTC sustain itself in the coming years.  Not sure I completely agree with them.

[HCLivess]

Litecoin is doomed to RIP anyway so ..

Thanks to coblee!  

So again, why is LTC doomed?

because of people that make stuff like (C.A.T.) Cryptsy Auto Trader lol
i see your Dogecoin program link in your sig then CAT listed for sale on that page with a Reddit page link lol

Selling a bot and supporting Doge coin and posting coin bullshit on Reddit = gay.

but you will of course come here and spout of about doing the right thing while no one is looking then do the opposite right ?
oooh those damn scam coins i hate them so much !!!!
pss, hey (whispers).. where is the Flappy coin or My Little Pony wallet download link
hahaha HypocriteTalk.org

I don't get it. Why are you talking about what is the right thing to do? Are you talking about me emptying my doge pockets when it was 240 satoshi? I didnt have 1 trillion so I hardly believe it moved the market a bit.

[HCLivess]

Litecoin is doomed to RIP anyway so ..

Thanks to coblee!  

So again, why is LTC doomed?

Because it was meant to lock out ASICs, now it has ASICs and the devs either can't change it without breaking the coin or were bought off.

Were ASICs a problem for BitCoin? Everyone speaks about securing the network and then they speak about how ASIC centralisation is wrong. I thought ASICs were overpriced (at least those for LTC) and basically useless - you can at least sell the GPUs.

LTC has an experienced development team
Open Chinese exchanges
Largest capitalization after BitCoin

[Pangia]

Were ASICs a problem for BitCoin? Everyone speaks about securing the network and then they speak about how ASIC centralisation is wrong. I thought ASICs were overpriced (at least those for LTC) and basically useless - you can at least sell the GPUs.

LTC has an experienced development team
Open Chinese exchanges
Largest capitalization after BitCoin

The feeling on /r/dogecoin right now (whether right or wrong) is that Charlie Lee sees something troubling on the horizon for LTC with the coming ASICs and is proposing the LTC/DOGE merged mining primarily for the benefit for LTC.  

I don't agree with their opinion though.

[Pangia]

In regards to Charlie Lee's recommendation, here's a top post from one of the top threads on /r/dogecoin

[–]GoodShibe
It's a great idea. if you're Litecoin looking to take down an upstart.


http://www.reddit.com/r/dogecoin/comments/22f20o/of_wolves_and_weasels_day_89_moolah_and_merged/

[Pangia]

BTC survived ASICs because it was the first, and its hashrate distribution is already a disgrace. The whole point of LTC was to lock out ASICs, without that, it is nothing, just a waste of a blockchain.

Excellent point.  The Dogecoin DEVs seems to believe that ASIC's will be the second coming. They fail to realize that ASIC's will be controlled by a very few.

[digitalindustry]

Litedoge needs to come together.

If the Doge team think that its LTC showing weakness i think that's a mistake.

I always looked at it that LTC was helping Doge ?