why a new coin just for a new service?

[thedok]

I mean like all the pot type coins, why dont they just buy into the most established one then add their services/webstore. Seems pointless to start a new coin just for a new webstore. Anyways it your (devs) time and effort your wasting

[djm34]

I mean like all the pot type coins, why dont they just buy into the most established one then add their services/webstore. Seems pointless to start a new coin just for a new webstore. Anyways it your (devs) time and effort your wasting

because some people are greedy and expect to make more profit by selling you those coins... 

[thedok]

Its like that euph coin, they try, fail and now thay talking about accepting btc, they should just accept btc only to start with. If all these devs concentrated on btc it may be a bit more than the pipe dream that it is

[DrGrid]

You are absolutely right, most of the altcoin services don't require an altcoin and should most probably be down through Bitcoin / Counterparty, or another well established blockchain type services. The only real innovations that justify a new block chain are changes to the consensus protocol, changes from the original Bitcoin block header and trials of a new hashing algorithm. Beyond that I really can't see any justification for an Altcoin except that Devs and community members like profit.

[gnargnar]

yeah, fuck, let's run a monopoly.... why a healthy competition when you can have only one that rule?
bring back the facism!
 

[Videlicet]

Because every new coin is trying to re-create the success of Bitcoin - by standing on Bitcoin's shoulders instead of offering something new to the industry that warrant such success. I do believe this reduces how seriously people take alt-coins. Don't see a need for the same codebase cloned thousands of times - maybe altcoins could start merging projects - less is more in my opinion.

Thank You,
Viz.

[gatra]

yeah, fuck, let's run a monopoly.... why a healthy competition when you can have only one that rule?
bring back the facism!
 

why? because that's not healthy competition, that's just polluting the scene with useless coins.

[gnargnar]

yeah, fuck, let's run a monopoly.... why a healthy competition when you can have only one that rule?
bring back the facism!
 

why? because that's not healthy competition, that's just polluting the scene with useless coins.

thanks for proving my point 

[Pastafarian]

yeah, fuck, let's run a monopoly.... why a healthy competition when you can have only one that rule?
bring back the facism!
 

Yes healthy competition is beneficial for all of us!   As a member of the Sativacoin (STV) develop team, we work hard everyday because we would like to become the most trusted and valuable coin for the MJ sector. Though we have competitors, many have failed to support and give thanks to the most important part of crypto...the community!

Arnel
Pastafarian

New STV thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=874071

[yourstruly]

We do not think there needs to be a new blockchain for a updates that only affect the client, we wrong a long essay about it here: https://blackwavelabs.com

[Daedelus]

Nxt Monetary System (experimental version released to tesnet in the last 24 hours) will go a long way to solving this problem. This is the Nxt implementation of Sidechains.

There are a selection of properties (reservable, mineable, non-suffleable etc) that can be combined. Initial properties will include for:

Crowdfunding
Shop Discount Vouchers/Tokens (can only be transferred from and back to the issuer account)
POW (on top of a POS currency)
Inflation (allow creation of more shop vouchers, dividends, currency)


The possible combinations could see some interesting experiments in crypto. Further properties can be added to Monetary System as the scene develops, if there is a need. It will be interesting to watch.


Monetary System Documentation >>> https://bitbucket.org/JeanLucPicard/nxt/issue/205/monetary-system-documenation