Which altcoin features can you not live without?

[coinsolidation]

I'm trying to work out which existing altcoin features are actually valuable to members of the crypto community - please share your thoughts so we can separate out the fud.

[kelsey]

The extreme price fluctuation feature, or lets face it 99% of forum members wouldn't be here 

[lynn_402]

Definitely the fast confirmations. I get quite impatient when transfering Bitcoins, because I'm used to pretty much every alts getting 6 confirmations in less than 10 minutes.

The other features are just icing on the cake, as long as the coin is secure.

[iGotAIDS]

I for one can NOT live with any alt coin worth less than .001. Build in to your next coin that price point but the ability for me to instamine a fuck ton of them so I can get one of them CryptsyBackroom(TM) level payouts.

[Vann]

I'm probably being generous when I say 99% of altcoins have nothing to do with being a legitimate currency. There are all the same and have no purpose other than to scam BTC from bigger fools based on illusionary nonsense at best or are simply outright scams.

You aren't dealing with companies backed by real assets and customers or fiat currency backed by GDP. Any value ascribed to a crypto currency, especially one without innovation is speculative in it's entirety and highly subjective.

Just like the dot-com startup mania of the 90's was based on inflated projections and capitalization that vaporized over night, few will survive long term. For an altcoin to have any real value it must function as currency that fills a need first, otherwise you are simply trading hot air.

[lynn_402]

I'm probably being generous when I say 99% of altcoins have nothing to do with being a legitimate currency. There are all the same and have no purpose other than to scam BTC from bigger fools based on illusionary nonsense at best or are simply outright scams.

You aren't dealing with companies backed by real assets and customers or fiat currency backed by GDP. Any value ascribed to a crypto currency, especially one without innovation is speculative in it's entirety and highly subjective.

Just like the dot-com startup mania of the 90's was based on inflated projections and capitalization that vaporized over night, few will survive long term. For an altcoin to have any real value it must function as currency that fills a need first, otherwise you are simply trading hot air.

It's the same thing for Bitcoin. If many users think the currency has value, and they use it, and they are relatively loyal to it, then it's safe to say that it is valuable.

To know if a crypto is legit, the most important thing is to study its userbase. If it satisfies the three critera mentionned above, then it will survive.

[mymenace]

existing altcoin features that are actually valuable to members of the crypto community



to me it would be

fast

secure

payment gateway and accepted by business (great marketing)

no instaming, no ipo, no premine, dev's earn money off of payment gateway (the more the coin is successful the more the dev earns)

superior wallet (most wallets look like something out of windows 95) wallet should include everything, mining, trading, purchasing, accounts, payees, messaging etc etc etc

an app with the above all achievable on an android (no-one likes iphone but i could be wrong)


ohh ohh and mining that is done at one hash rate only (the more hashing you throw at the coin does not matter as it will only accept the one hash rate), so that it is achievable by all. Can be mined on a smart phone and every thing i do in the wallet  gets me rewarded with coins




    

[coinsolidation]

This is already an interesting discussion that seems to be going in opposing directions.

Is it fair to suggest that many of the needs described so far are those of traders and investors? with little mention of currency users.

Perhaps user first design is required, the given requirements appear to be simple at first: fast and secure.

mymenace makes a good point about focussing on payment gateways, this seems to tie in with user first design, ensuring users can actually use the currency as a currency.

vann, you make note of innovation, is there any specific area you'd be looking to see innovation in?

So far altcoins seem to have focussed on solving: 1) anonymity, 2) altcoin induced problems with mining (new algo's, multipool handling and the like) - do any feature innovation which is useful for end users as opposed to those in the business of making/minting/trading the coins?

[lynn_402]

This is already an interesting discussion that seems to be going in opposing directions.

Is it fair to suggest that many of the needs described so far are those of traders and investors? with little mention of currency users.

Perhaps user first design is required, the given requirements appear to be simple at first: fast and secure.

mymenace makes a good point about focussing on payment gateways, this seems to tie in with user first design, ensuring users can actually use the currency as a currency.

vann, you make note of innovation, is there any specific area you'd be looking to see innovation in?

So far altcoins seem to have focussed on solving: 1) anonymity, 2) altcoin induced problems with mining (new algo's, multipool handling and the like) - do any feature innovation which is useful for end users as opposed to those in the business of making/minting/trading the coins?

Indeed, these new features seem to serve no other purpose than to generate hype for investors.
The anonymity features since irrelevant; with BTC, there are ways to be anonymous if you really want to be (ie. the coin mixers, which are not more centralised than Darkcoin's masternodes, plus their is Dark Wallet in the work).
I also don't really see the point in new algos either. If someone is truly interested in a coin, buying a 120$ ASIC is quite accessible really. And they use less ressources, and prevent attacks by botnets. They seem to be simply a way for miners to make money of their old rigs.

[coinsolidation]

Indeed, these new features seem to serve no other purpose than to generate hype for investors.
The anonymity features since irrelevant; with BTC, there are ways to be anonymous if you really want to be (ie. the coin mixers, which are not more centralised than Darkcoin's masternodes, plus their is Dark Wallet in the work).
I also don't really see the point in new algos either. If someone is truly interested in a coin, buying a 120$ ASIC is quite accessible really. And they use less ressources, and prevent attacks by botnets. They seem to be simply a way for miners to make money of their old rigs.

I agree and would suggest it is fair to allow miners to make money from their own rigs of course - but only when using the rigs for a good purpose, which would be a coin which puts users first.

BTC was balanced with it's mining algorithm and technology increased over time. New coins can have a huge amount of hashing power available instantly which is where the difference is.

I have a feeling that if other parameters were tweaked on a sha256d or scrypt coin, parameters like starting difficulty, allowed block time deviance, and diff retargeting most multipool issues would be solved.

[lynn_402]

I agree and would suggest it is fair to allow miners to make money from their own rigs of course - but only when using the rigs for a good purpose, which would be a coin which puts users first.

BTC was balanced with it's mining algorithm and technology increased over time. New coins can have a huge amount of hashing power available instantly which is where the difference is.

I have a feeling that if other parameters were tweaked on a sha256d or scrypt coin, parameters like starting difficulty, allowed block time deviance, and diff retargeting most multipool issues would be solved.

That is true, however, the new algos doesn't seem to me like they solve that problem. A huge amount of hashing power is available from the start no matter what the algorithm is, because a lot of GPU farms have been built this summer when scrypt-mining with them was profitable.

[Este Nuno]

These days I think in order for a new coin to compete it should with anonymous transactions and coloured coins(asset exchange) at least.

New mining algos or a good PoS system(or a hybrid) is interesting too.

A good non-joke name is also something that I think people underestimate the importance of. Dogecoin was probably a one time thing.

[coinsolidation]

These days I think in order for a new coin to compete it should with anonymous transactions and coloured coins(asset exchange) at least.

New mining algos or a good PoS system(or a hybrid) is interesting too.

A good non-joke name is also something that I think people underestimate the importances of. Dogecoin was probably a one time thing.

Is there any reason to have anonymous transactions baked in, when third party vendors offering this service can compete with each other to innovate and excel, far more than a developer or developer team with other commitments can?

I would ask the same question of coloured coins, the extensibility of the bitcoin protocol, and therefore anything based on that protocol, allows any module built on top of bitcoin to be built on any to be developed coin also.

Contrarily the native addition of any feature like this will most likely preclude the use of possibly superior third party solutions which could otherwise be integrated seamlessly, offering choice and competition in the marketplace.

I hope this doesn't come across as being against such features, full discussion on the positives and negatives is useful before making decisions to include something.

You have raised some interesting questions, and make a fine point about coin naming.

[Este Nuno]

These days I think in order for a new coin to compete it should with anonymous transactions and coloured coins(asset exchange) at least.

New mining algos or a good PoS system(or a hybrid) is interesting too.

A good non-joke name is also something that I think people underestimate the importances of. Dogecoin was probably a one time thing.

Is there any reason to have anonymous transactions baked in, when third party vendors offering this service can compete with each other to innovate and excel, far more than a developer or developer team with other commitments can?

I would ask the same question of coloured coins, the extensibility of the bitcoin protocol, and therefore anything based on that protocol, allows any module built on top of bitcoin to be built on any to be developed coin also.

Contrarily the native addition of any feature like this will most likely preclude the use of possibly superior third party solutions which could otherwise be integrated seamlessly, offering choice and competition in the marketplace.

I hope this doesn't come across as being against such features, full discussion on the positives and negatives is useful before making decisions to include something.

You have raised some interesting questions, and make a fine point about coin naming.

Theoretically or even ideally 3rd parties would build upon it like they do bitcoin but in order for people to use a new coin from the beginning it has to offer some utility I think. It shouldn't be a requirement per se but the altcoin community is definitely hungry for a true anonymous coin. And an asset exchange adds another dimension to a coin.

If a coin has other innovations I guess these things aren't mandatory. But I think the demand for these features is high right now and seeing a coin offering these cutting edge features adds a lot of credibility I think.

[coinsolidation]

These days I think in order for a new coin to compete it should with anonymous transactions and coloured coins(asset exchange) at least.

New mining algos or a good PoS system(or a hybrid) is interesting too.

A good non-joke name is also something that I think people underestimate the importances of. Dogecoin was probably a one time thing.

Is there any reason to have anonymous transactions baked in, when third party vendors offering this service can compete with each other to innovate and excel, far more than a developer or developer team with other commitments can?

I would ask the same question of coloured coins, the extensibility of the bitcoin protocol, and therefore anything based on that protocol, allows any module built on top of bitcoin to be built on any to be developed coin also.

Contrarily the native addition of any feature like this will most likely preclude the use of possibly superior third party solutions which could otherwise be integrated seamlessly, offering choice and competition in the marketplace.

I hope this doesn't come across as being against such features, full discussion on the positives and negatives is useful before making decisions to include something.

You have raised some interesting questions, and make a fine point about coin naming.

Theoretically or even ideally 3rd parties would build upon it like they do bitcoin but in order for people to use a new coin from the beginning it has to offer some utility I think. It shouldn't be a requirement per say but the altcoin community is definitely hungry for a true anonymous coin. And an asset exchange adds another dimension to a coin.

If a coin has other innovations I guess these things aren't mandatory. But I think the demand for these features is high right now and seeing a coin offering these cutting edge features adds a lot of credibility I think.

You make a solid argument there, utility above what is standard will add credibility.

Perhaps something can also be done to prevent 51% on PoW - security and decentralization is important.

A refined and more useful API, one that is truly RESTful and HTTP compliant may also help.

So far we have the basics covered:

• basic chain configuration to ensure a healthy distribution of coins over time
• a friendly minimal remuneration approach
• multipool diff handling
• user and gateway focus to the entire project

[/list]

and we are starting to get some core feature requirements. This is initial brief still needs some work before it can be specified correctly, certainly a good foundation to build on.

Are there any other features, requests, or common issues you can think of that we could potentially address?

[mymenace]

merge mined with bitcoin


only need anonymous transactions if we have something to hide, maybe a feature you can turn on and off, e.g. i do not want transactions to show up of any "personal items" my spouse and I buy


+1 to silkcoin and the new wallet, very pretty and functional

existing altcoin features that are actually valuable to members of the crypto community



to me it would be

fast

secure

payment gateway and accepted by business (great marketing)

no instaming, no ipo, no premine, dev's earn money off of payment gateway (the more the coin is successful the more the dev earns)

superior wallet (most wallets look like something out of windows 95) wallet should include everything, mining, trading, purchasing, accounts, payees, messaging etc etc etc

an app with the above all achievable on an android (no-one likes iphone but i could be wrong)


ohh ohh and mining that is done at one hash rate only (the more hashing you throw at the coin does not matter as it will only accept the one hash rate), so that it is achievable by all. Can be mined on a smart phone and every thing i do in the wallet  gets me rewarded with coins


  

[Zer0Sum]

I'm probably being generous when I say 99% of altcoins have nothing to do with being a legitimate currency.

This is where you went off the rails.

There are ZERO cryptos that are a "legit currency"...
Even Bitcoin velocity has flatlined in spite of zillions of new retail outlets.

The IRS was correct when they ruled Bitcoin was "property"... essentially a commodity.

Do you have a general problem with "property" or "stores of wealth"...
Like golds or silver or silver or goats or sacks of potatoes...
Because that is what that $8 billion in coins = storage of wealth.

People need to get over this "currency" fetish...
It's just not gonna happen in this generation of crypto.

[mymenace]

This only applies to the united states, here we have to declare crypto to the taxman to be taxed as earnings, e.g. it is a currency

regardless of what the IRS says

if it walks like a duck, talks like a duck it is a duck

e.g. you buy with btc, your sell with btc, you trade like forex with btc, sounds like a currency to me

I'm probably being generous when I say 99% of altcoins have nothing to do with being a legitimate currency.

This is where you went off the rails.

There are ZERO cryptos that are a "legit currency"...
Even Bitcoin velocity has flatlined in spite of zillions of new retail outlets.

The IRS was correct when they ruled Bitcoin was "property"... essentially a commodity.

Do you have a general problem with "property" or "stores of wealth"...
Like golds or silver or silver or goats or sacks of potatoes...
Because that is what that $8 billion in coins = storage of wealth.

People need to get over this "currency" fetish...
It's just not gonna happen in this generation of crypto.

[mymenace]

mymenace you are the man

I want this coin, i want it nnnnoooooooooowwwwwwww!!!!!

merge mined with bitcoin


only need anonymous transactions if we have something to hide, maybe a feature you can turn on and off, e.g. i do not want transactions to show up of any "personal items" my spouse and I buy


+1 to silkcoin and the new wallet, very pretty and functional

existing altcoin features that are actually valuable to members of the crypto community



to me it would be

fast

secure

payment gateway and accepted by business (great marketing)

no instaming, no ipo, no premine, dev's earn money off of payment gateway (the more the coin is successful the more the dev earns)

superior wallet (most wallets look like something out of windows 95) wallet should include everything, mining, trading, purchasing, accounts, payees, messaging etc etc etc

an app with the above all achievable on an android (no-one likes iphone but i could be wrong)


ohh ohh and mining that is done at one hash rate only (the more hashing you throw at the coin does not matter as it will only accept the one hash rate), so that it is achievable by all. Can be mined on a smart phone and every thing i do in the wallet  gets me rewarded with coins


  

[coinsolidation]

wallet should include everything, mining, trading, purchasing, accounts, payees, messaging etc etc etc

ohh ohh and mining that is done at one hash rate only (the more hashing you throw at the coin does not matter as it will only accept the one hash rate), so that it is achievable by all. Can be mined on a smart phone and every thing i do in the wallet  gets me rewarded with coins

merge mined with bitcoin

Thank you for all the feedback, I've reduced it to the items which may warrant some discussion.

1. Swiss Army Knife / Monolithic Wallet
The introduction of all the features you mentioned feels like bloat and the introduction of many attack vectors. Whilst they are all cool/novel things, which would you say are the bare minimum requirements for the coin to have utility?

2. One hash rate only
I need to think about this properly, can you enlighten on why you suggest this, is it so that everyone has a fair chance at creating money, or are there alternative reasons?

3. Merged Mining
If we go past the specification stage and implement this, then the project will be a very long term project and aim to offer a viable alternative to bitcoin. I can see that merged mining could help the miners, and that it could theoretically make the network more secure (a higher difficulty and more hashing). But I worry that it would force fee reduction, making the network less secure, and that such tight association would be sending a message from the off that this is a second class coin, always to be subsidiary to Bitcoin.

Can you comment?